How important is a candidate's 'faith' when you vote?

[Philosoraptor]

I remember when John F. Kennedy's Catholicism was an issue, I can still hear the adults discussing it with fear, 'a Catholic president? America's never had one!".

reagan's handlers started this crap with their association with the Morale Majority assholes, bush the second blatantly sought out the guaranteed Christian Conservative vote by PRETENDING to be a man of deep faith, and it worked swimmingly. The repubs COUNTED on those votes, and got them, many times. And it was so easy to do, a mere mention of Jesus is all it took, plus lying about praying regularly. The suckers ate it up like free ice cream.

Now I hear certain Christian Conservatives are alarmed at the prospect of a Mormon president, some even calling mitt romney a member of a weird cult. joe lieberman would've loved to have been our first Jewish president, thank God that didn't happen.

I doubt that a candidate expressing NO faith or atheism would have a chance in hell of winning, or an avowed Wiccan or Muslim or Santa Ria follower, but who knows?

Personally I never even considered a candidates religion, but millions do, and I might even at some point. All I know is most repubs FAKE their faith for votes, and wouldn't know a true Christian if they tripped over one, but they never fail to hoax and bamboozle the faithful.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[charlie]

3. Color me unsurprised n/t

[Philosoraptor]

5. A person has to earn my trust.

And I trust no one but my wife, and lately,...I don't know....

[oldgrowth]

7. It's Worked out so well they to love to kill !!!!!!

[cynatnite]

16. So what does that make an athiest or agnostic?

Less trustworthy? Do you think that if someone expresses non-belief in a god they don't believe in anything? Please, be specific because I don't understand how having some sort of faith makes one more trustworthy than one who does not.

[dsa]

25. An odd argument

From someone with Reverend Martin Luther King as his icon!

As for me, I've personally had bad experiences with atheists.

[RebelOne]

38. As an atheist, I would like to know what kinds

of bad experiences you have had.

[SammyWinstonJack]

99. As an atheist, I would like too know also.

[Nunyabiz]

118. As an Atheist I would like to know just how

freaking crazy the candidate is and religion is a good barometer of the crazy scale.
Technically religion should not be a question or have anything whatsoever to do with a political position.

At least 15-20% of politicians are Atheist/Agnostic anyway but lie about it to keep the lunatics from frothing at the mouth.

[SammyWinstonJack]

134. Good point!

[blondeatlast]

117. As a Christian, so would I. The vast majority of my friends, even my husband,

is/are atheist or agnostic and even my 10 year old son claims he doesn't believe.

Nonetheless, I don't bring up the issue with them nor do they with me and I trust them all with my life.

I'm always suyspicious when I hear this argument from either side...

[cynatnite]

42. How is it odd?

MLK was more about civil rights for all than he was his religion in many people's eyes. And I would love to know about your bad experiences with atheists and how that has influenced this sweeping condemnation of them.

[dsa]

60. The motivation for King's movement

was deeply seated in religion. He invokes God and religion countless times in his speeches.

As for the rest, check your inbox.

[cynatnite]

63. Being agnostic doesn't mean that I can't admire a hero like MLK...

I'm not out making sweeping condemnation of all christians even though I'm agnostic. I know what's in King's speeches and his motivations, but he'll forever be known as the man who changed the nation by his passive resistance and civil rights.

Still waiting to hear about your bad atheists experiences.

[dave_p]

54. Sorry to hear that

I've personally had good experiences with both easy-going believers and committed atheists. Were your bad experiences with atheists who'd actually thought through the issue, or with people who just didn't believe in anything and didn't care? I've no time for nihilism myself, but there are plenty of honest atheists - it'd be easier for us after all to just pretend to go along with the crowd.

[Az]

57. What could possibly justify the dismissal of an entire group of people

What happened to you that you distrust atheists so?

[ClintonTyree]

18. So the George Bushs, Dick Cheneys and their ilk....

are generally better people than someone like........me? :eyes: Thank you for clearing up who should and should not be trusted. Every self-described christian is better than a moral atheist like myself, is that it?

Your opinion that christians are better than non-believers is exactly the reason I keep religion at a far distance. Your "holier than thou" attitude is a real turn-off.

[Gelliebeans]

22. Guess we should

take our untrustworthiness and forget about running for prez. anytime soon... :evilgrin:

[ClintonTyree]

24. You couldn't pay me enough to take that job.

And I'm too moral to step into the cesspool of politics. :)

[Gelliebeans]

28. I remember reading

that it is illegal to hold office in certain states if you are an Atheist. That was the reason for my facetious reply. ;)
I agree with you about the morality and cesspool of politics. :)

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

59. Look at it from a national standpoint

however. Polls have indicated that Americans in general are not in favor of an atheist president at this time. Personally, I think it is the result of a bit of brainwashing but also a lack of understanding of atheist's ethics. The brainwashing goes back to post-WWII, when Communism was looked at as a real threat. One of the things that was said again and again about the Communists, particularly Stalin, was that he was an atheist (at least that was what I remember being told when I was a youngster), and that the things he did, such as collectivization, which lead to mass starvation, was a result of his atheism. Same thing with Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge--the Killing Fields were a result of the atheistic/communistic philosophy, which was that people were expendable and it didn't matter what you did to them.

You may rightly cry foul about this, and I won't argue--but the point is that many Americans derive their opinion of atheism on what they have been told about people like these. Couple this with the fact that most atheists don't make a big deal about their worldview (Until I read it here on the board, I didn't know that Bill Gates was an atheist) and that they don't tend to talk about their worldview to people face to face (the impression I got when I asked a question about it here a while back), and atheists become one of those groups people know little about.

I've had some atheists here become highly offended when it was suggested that they set down what they see as the ethical part of their world view. But I think it is important to do, if only to start an education process with the general public. Having them know that atheists do very much care about the environment and their fellow humans would counteract much of the general impression that people have been given about atheists since about 1945.

Hey, I understand what it is like to have your world view totally misunderstood and twisted around--and yes, sometimes it gets tiring to repeat the same thing again and again (for me, it's that all Muslims aren't terrorists, that American Muslims HAVE condemned 9/11 since 9/11, etc etc), but it is important to do-you can only change things by reaching out and changing one mind at a time.

[Gelliebeans]

74. I appreciate the

thoughtful reply and I have been around long enough to know that education process takes time. I hear ya on the Muslim thing trust me. :)
I also know that those that continue to make broad brushed bullshit assertions to denigrate peoples' trustworthiness or goodness based on faith or lack of is silly and by simply adding "in my opinion" to those statements only furthers a misconception and piles on the education process that needs to be addressed. For this reason it is quite frustrating.

I have no problem voting for someone of faith as long as they will uphold the constitution, as proof I have voted for someone of faith for the last 20 years as I haven't had the opportunity to vote for a Progressive/Atheist in my neck of the woods.

:hi:

*edited for grammar

[cynatnite]

79. At some forum I read a posting that said Christopher Reeve was an atheist...

I didn't know this. He had said this on Larry King several years ago. People were really upset over this and I think it changed their opinion of him. You reminded me of that. I think you nailed it.

[Gelliebeans]

89. She did it very eloquently

It is an education process. I do find myself at times running out of patience and I have to remind myself, baby steps take time.

[dsa]

27. Re-read my post

It's full of plenty of qualifiers you apparently ignored to pursue your preconceived notions of what I said. I said nothing about christians vs. non-christians and made it clear that my opinion is based on personal experiences you know nothing about. In fact, it is because of statements like yours that I hold the position I do.

[ClintonTyree]

125. Somewhat difficult now that it's been deleted.....

the Mods don't delete responses for nothing, 'ya know? BUT, from another response......"someone who has a belief in some faith is generally a better person and more trustworthy". That sounds pretty much like a slap in the face to anyone who doesn't share your faith, or any faith, to me.

I'm not trying to be belligerent or stir things up, but you have to admit, you might have worded that differently. And it's because of condescending, holier-than-thou opinions such as that which make me hold the opinion I do as well. Touche! :)

[Gelliebeans]

21. Wow

:eyes: talk about broad brush, "someone who has a belief in some faith is generally a better person and more trustworthy". :wow:

[Philosoraptor]

33. Trust me, God is innnnnn, his holy temmmmple....

[Arkansas Granny]

44. I believe that the current administration has shown us that faith

and morality do not necessarily go hand in hand nor does faith determine trustworthiness. I would not support one candidate over another solely based on their faith or lack of it.

[Az]

46. You are of course entitled to your opinion but I find it very insulting

Repugnant even. And that is my opinion.

[gollygee]

58. I could vote for someone who is religious, but I'd have trouble voting for someone

who thinks I'm less likely to be trustworthy and more likely to be a worse person because I'm not religious. I don't vote for bigots.

[Oilwellian]

61. Have to disagree

I find the people who wear their "faith" on their sleeve are the most hateful & hypocritical people on the planet.

[dsa]

68. NOW HANG ON A MINUTE HERE!

All these criticisms you've been posting have absolutely NO relation to what I originally said! I never condemned all non-religious people. I never said anyone who isn't Christian is untrustworthy. I never said I would only vote for someone who believes the same as me. In fact, all of those statements are exactly the opposite of what I posted.

My point is that I am more likely to vote for someone who professes an honest belief in religion than someone who doesn't. What's the difference between that and saying you'd be more likely to vote for someone who believes in evolution than someone who doesn't? Religion is a factor that is important to me when I am voting just like being a member of the ACLU might be a factor important to you when you're voting.

So if you want to call that bigoted, that's your prerogative. Just remember that being prejudiced against people who profess religious beliefs is just as bigoted.

[cynatnite]

72. You said you've had bad experiences with atheists...

when you haven't met them all. Your experience with a few out of the millions there are is being used to paint an entire group with the same brush. That's like me saying all Christians are untrustworthy because of George Bush.

[dsa]

77. And I think my private message

provided some compelling reasons why.

[cynatnite]

81. No, it didn't...

I replied, BTW. You're using the actions of a few to justify condemning an entire group.

[dsa]

88. *sigh*

I never condemned an entire group. But I've had enough of this pointless debating since you are unwilling to even consider my point of view. This experience gives me new respect for the wisdom of the following statement:

"Never wrestle with a pig. You'll just get dirty and the pig likes it."

[Az]

91. You have not been discussing this in good faith

You are maintaining a prejudicial attitude and presenting what appears to be a close minded approach. You bundle up all nonbelievers and toss them away because of some experience you had with a limited number of individuals. You have given no reason for this attitude other than to say you have your reasons. I can only assume that your reason is hatred. And for that I have pity for you.

[Az]

84. No, not really. Mostly because you didn't send it to everyone

Meanwhile you continue to insist that atheists and people with no religion are untrustworthy. Sorry but thats just prejudice. Get to know me before you hate me.

[gollygee]

87. I know someone whose house was robbed by two young black men

and she uses that as an excuse to believe that black people are generally less trustworthy than white people.

My parents' house was robbed by two young white men. They don't use that as an excuse to believe that white people are generally less trustworthy than black people.

Funny how that works.

You being hurt at some point by people who happened to not be religious doesn't say anything about people who aren't religious as a whole.

[Az]

73. Its because you dismiss the individual as part of a group

That is prejudice in a nutshell. I have no faith in any religion. Yet you dismiss me before you even have a chance to no me. I find that insulting.

[Jonathan50]

138. A simple question or two

"My point is that I am more likely to vote for someone who professes an honest belief in religion than someone who doesn't."


How do you know that the profession of faith is indeed honest?

Are you like Bush when he looked into Putin's eyes and saw his "soul"?

[Solly Mack]

2. I long for the day when pandering to religion is just so passe

dare to dream...

[Philosoraptor]

6. I'd like to see a candidate refuse to discuss his/her faith.

And say it's nobody's business but my own, but who knows, that might alarm millions.

[zanne]

8. I would love that!

And I'm sure alot of us would.

[Zenlitened]

114. Sign me up for a piece o' that dream, if you don't mind.

Because the instances of a candidate discussing "faith" that DON'T come across as pandering these days... well, they're few and far between. :(

[radfringe]

4. not very

mostly not at all, although I do get nervous around those who wave any religious text around and professes to have a direct phone hook-up and god's personal e-mail address

[Philosoraptor]

9. With pat robertson's 150+ morality moles in our govt., ...

...like missy monica goodling two shoes and many, many other Christian conservative covert operatives, who infest our current 'government' like vermin with viruses, maybe it's time we start asking people what their faith affiliation is and what agendas they might have toward theocracy.

[Clark2008]

48. That's just as bad as No. 1 saying (s)he thinks people WITH faith

are more trustworthy.

Both opinions are sort of "knee-jerky" and based on preconceived notions, don't you think?

I have several Bibles, a Qur'an and the teaching guides with the Qur'an and a Torah laying about and I'm not anything to be nervous over.

[radfringe]

65. based on past experiences

and sorry if this sounds prejudicial... I've had several experiences with the self-avowed born again holier than thou types where I've over looked the zealous expression of being a christian and have ended up having a knife put in my back

I'm aware of my attitude, and I try not to hold it against anyone - but I also inspect the hand that is not carrying a bible

[JoePhilly]

69. In the past it didn't matter to me, but now ...

the more a candidate talks about faith, how much they pray, how much they talk to God, how much God talks back, they scare me.

I've had enough of right-wingers who believe that they are God's little soldiers. And many of them use the "God thing" as a way to get credibility and trust that the don't deserve, and have not earned.

[murielm99]

10. I was already wary

of born-again Christians when Carter ran. I had enough of them in my family and workplace. I didn't want one in the White House.

I looked at Carter's record, and saw that he was worthy of my vote. And I realized, after a time, that his faith was genuine. He lives what he believes.

I think the republicans who followed him realized that Carter grabbed lots of people's attention with his unabashed faith. Many pretenders followed him. Reagan, for instance, gave a great deal of lip service to being a Christian. His own son said that dad seldom darkened the door of a church.

The Moral Majority and the television evangelism movement was a big power by 1980. They knew how to use their power, and were in turn ripe for being used.

I don't think we have seen the anticipated backlash against the religious right yet. We have seen the anger and revulsion against pedophile priests, and the laughter over the hypocrisy of the mega-church pastor who went to a gay prostitute. I don't know what it is going to take for more people to wake up, to develop a distrust of those who wear their phony religiosity on their sleeves.

I wish we could find a strong candidate who would say, "I am a Christian. I belong to ____ denomination. I believe in the separation of church and state. My faith is between me and my God." (I said Christian, because I don't think anyone else stands a chance).

Politicians need to start making some parts of their lives off-limits again. Keeping their faith private is a good start. Depending on the rest of his record, I would be inclined to vote for someone who kept his faith to himself.

[ProgressiveFool]

130. Amen nt

[gobblechops]

11. Doesn't matter to me

Shouldn't be any religious test for public office,morality and doing the right thing doesn't have a damn thing to do with faith.

[Philosoraptor]

13. The faithful STILL think w is a Godly man put there by divinity.

I swear they do, and they will take it all the way to Armageddon.

[gobblechops]

19. I heard them

on NPR say just that when they were questioning people who support bush still,they all said he was a godly man and thats why they supported him,I just wish those people would pick up the new testament and read it instead of listening to some preacher man leave out the meek shall inherit the earth stuff.

[Raksha]

26. I've done a complete and total flip-flop in that area.

I used to think religion was a personal matter and basically none of anyone else's business, but thanks to the religious right I now have a list of "religious tests" a mile long, all of them having to do with keeping theocrats as far away from public office as possible.

[gobblechops]

30. you do

have a point there I certainly don't want there faith to interfere with issues I feel strongly about,just because its your faith doesn't mean you have a right to deny people there rights etc.

They do tend to ignore the line -Congress shall make no laws respecting a establishment of religion.

[ClintonTyree]

12. Not at all.

In fact, if there was an avowed agnostic or atheist running they'd get my total support. Pandering to the Ned Flanders of the nation is a definite turn-off as far as I'm concerned. :puke: Of course we'll never see an avowed agnostic or atheist run for President. The "angry daddy in the sky" crowd wouldn't allow that. :eyes:

[EFerrari]

14. It's none of my business. n/t

[cynatnite]

15. Not at all...religion should have nothing to do with public office...

I think most politicians, many dems included, use their religion to pander for votes.

[Tyler Durden]

17. In Canada they find the phrase "God Bless America" foolish and ridiculous.

They would be as inclined to say "God Bless Canada" at the end of a political speech as they would to say "Fish for sale!"

One of my friends asked me why our politicians say that. Isn't religion a personal rather than political issue? Do we in the 'States infer that God should "Bless America" but NOT bless other countries?

[dsa]

29. In America, we find most everything Canadian foolish and ridiculous

:rofl:

[Tyler Durden]

32. Yeah LOVE those foolish concepts....

Like Universal Healthcare, Parliamentary Democracy, and Government by Coalition.

We have it SO much better here.
:crazy:

[Philosoraptor]

34. Canada would be a great living space for the master race.

We've got our eye on you Canada, with your many Frenchies and poisonous Canadian Bacon.

[dsa]

39. More like Anne Murray, Celine Dion, Molson Beer

and other assorted things that suck, eh?

"Canada is, in fact, well on its way to passing Mexico as the world's best nation that shares a land border with the USA."
- The Uncyclopedia

[charlie]

41. Barry Manilow, Britney Spears, Miller Lite

Yeah, we rule.

[dsa]

70. I don't drink beer

But I have both Barry Manilow and Britney Spears songs in my mp3 collection. I even won a Britney Spears karaoke contest once. I had all the fellas panting while I wore my little schoolgirl outfit. You won't admit it, but you know you want to see pictures, charlie. ;)

[charlie]

75. Rocket science prodigy

who, as it turns out, also looks like Britney Spears. Right-o. Yeah, send me pictures and I'll try to find the website you've pinched them from. It'll be fun.

[dsa]

83. So smart people can't be pretty?

Now that's what I call bigoted!

[charlie]

90. Yer a hoot

I have no reason to trust your steadily inflating self-description. Stuff your bigotry charge and stuff your "you know you want it" skeezing.

[H2O Man]

109. I think that

Michelle Malkin's husband recently filmed her in a cheer-leading uniform.

[Az]

76. Barry Manilow is an atheist

Just thought you might like to know :D

[dsa]

80. Doesn't make him a bad singer

You seem to like to imply that I condemn anyone who doesn't agree with me. Based on no evidence I might add.

[Az]

86. Not at all what I was implying

I am just trying to show that not all atheists are the same. I don't know what experiences you have had with us so I can't tell why you prejudge us. So the best I can do is try to find a connection. And you liking Barry Manilow, an atheist, is a connection.

[Forkboy]

45. For a religious person you sure do seem to lack tolerence of others.

[dsa]

56. It's good to see

Celine Dion still has such a passionate defender.

[Forkboy]

78. And it's not suprising you can't address my point about your own intolerence.

[dsa]

92. My grandmother once said

"The most intolerant people you will ever meet are the ones who say they are the defenders of tolerance."

[Az]

93. You really don't see it do you?

You seem to be jumping to the worst conclusions about people and then insulting them when they challenge you. You have called people pigs, intolerant, bigoted, all on top of your general dismissal of nonbelievers.

[dsa]

96. Is the pot calling the kettle?

Your posts have been far more inflammatory than anything I've posted. And you like to make unwarranted assumptions about what I've said that are untrue.

But I shall partake no more since it is time to go to work. I've enjoyed our fiery little debate, and is illogical as it may seem, I truly do hope you have a good day.

[Az]

101. What debate?

You haven't said anything beyond atheists are untrustworthy and that you have a reason for believing that. I have expressed my honest revulsion at this position but have made no direct insults toward you or your person. Instead I have consistently tried to engage you in discussion on the matter while you continuously avoid the matter. A debate would have been nice. But there has been no debate. Just you saying you believe atheists are untrustworthy.

I wish you no ill. And I hope you too have a nice day. But I hope you can open your mind a bit more and see that your position is hurtful to others and blinds you to people who are decent and caring.

[Forkboy]

94. Well then...you shouldn't have to worry as you aren't defending it.

[mondo joe]

100. So your grandmother is Bill O'Reilly?

Now it makes sense.

[gollygee]

102. HAHAHAHA

:hi:

[Zenlitened]

123. *ow.* *head... hurts.*

*image of bill o'reilly in mrs. doubtfire drag.*

*ow.*

:yoiks:

[Oilwellian]

85. For someone....

working on their doctorate in physics at the age of 20, you sure don't seem to "get it." :evilgrin:

[Gelliebeans]

95. I smelled something funny

and then the doorbang rang and it was pizza for everyone! :evilgrin:

[Forkboy]

120. Mmmmmmmmm....pizza!

:)

[donco6]

97. Speak for yourself, dumbass.

What's this "we" shit?

[mondo joe]

107. As charming as your right wing bumper sticker talking points are, what

do you find foolish or ridiculous about a country with higher literacy, better healthy outcomes and less crime than the US?

[Zenlitened]

124. "We" do? How do you define "we"?

:shrug:

[Stuckinthebush]

126. No, only idiotic Americans do...

and I think at last count their numbers were around 28% of the population.

The rest of us actually love Canada and find the country refreshing.

[mudesi]

122. I know I would NOT vote for a religious nut like Stephen Harper

One of the things that would turn me off of a candidate would be one who bases his/her political decisions on his/her personal religious beliefs. Martin had no problem calling himself a Christian, but he also said that the separation of church and state was far more important.

Even abortion is not much of an issue here, as I have posted before. I know people who are extremely against abortion, yet who voted Liberal, while others who are pro choice who voted Conservative in the last election because they didn't like the sponsorship scandal.

I think here in Canada, we don't have a divisive and manipulative media that puts everything in the left column or the right column like the American media does. We also have invested in education for decades, which, of course, leads to more nuanced and logical people who think when they vote, instead of using their emotions when they vote.

[Raksha]

20. Yes, a candidate's religion is VERY important to me.

I will not vote for a Christian conservative, or anyone who seems too invested in any literalist and authoritarian religion no matter what it is. It's not so much the particular religion, but if I have ANY reason to suspect theocratic tendencies, they don't get the benefit of the doubt. And the Moral Majority types have only themselves to thank for that.

[Philosoraptor]

23. Same here.

I didn't like it when Rev. Jesse Jackson ran for president, same for rev. pat robertson.

A reverend president? It's a no brainer.

[Zenlitened]

127. "... they don't get the benefit of the doubt..."

I agree. I've earned my wariness of religiosity the old-fashioned way: under the threat of hellfire and damnation! :D

"... if I have ANY reason to suspect theocratic tendencies, they don't get the benefit of the doubt. And the Moral Majority types have only themselves to thank for that.

For me, it feels like it's reached the point where I hear a candidate say "faith" and a warning buzzer sounds. The word has been so abused and misused, become so welded to anti-anything Liberal/Progressive/Reason-Based, that I really have become instinctively suspicious when I hear it.

I'm not saying that's a virtue, necessarily, because it does seem like a step on the path toward bigotry. I recognize that I have to make a mental effort to look beyond my emotional reaction and try to see the bigger picture. But it's not as if I woke up one day and decided, "Let's be anti-religion." Like you, I've been urged to this point by the Moral Majority types and the campaign they've waged against my values. I honestly don't think I was their enemy until they declared me the enemy.

Now here were are in 2007, the campaign for the presidency. And, once again, the Democrat I eventually vote for will have spent a certain amount of time on the trail discussing his or her faith. Framing policies and plans in the context of faith. Sometimes out of a genuine desire to do so, too often out of a knowledge that doing so is essentially a requirement in today's political climate.

I wish it didn't have to be this way. I wish they spoke solely in terms of progressive, humanist, bedrock American ideals -- which I find to be more solidly-grounded and broadly practical than appeals to "what god wants." But that's just not the way things work at the moment. So... ya look at the whole package, apply the best analysis you can, and make your pick. The way the game has always been played, I suppose. but it does seem the "faith" thing adds an extra layer of complication these days.

*Sigh.* Too bad my dream ticket of Carl Sagan/Kurt Vonnegut '08 will never come to be. Now there's a team that would have told it like it is! Wisdom and warmth, skepticism and a healthy dose of biting cynicism... that's what this country needs right now! :D

[maine_raptor]

31. It all depends.

If that person's sole source of guidance in solving public policy questions is found in some ancient, dusty, and clearly out-dated religious text, and refuses to listen to anything other than the script in that text, then they will not get my vote.

Or if a person proclaims that they follow a personal morality based upon a deeply held religious belief and urges all others to follow that same belief while at the same time violating those views within their own personal life, then they will not get my vote.

However, if a person says that they find religion a comfort and try to live their life according to that view, but have listened to other views and taken those views into account when making public policy, then they MAY get my vote.

[Swamp Rat]

35. "Santa Ria"

:rofl:

[Gelliebeans]

37. (((SwampRat)))

:hi:

[Swamp Rat]

116. Gelliebeans!!

:hug:

[DFW]

36. The more a candidate plays up his or her faith

The more it turns me off.

JFK played down his Catholicism. Bravo.

Carter didn't hide it, but didn't shove it in the nation's
face after being elected. Bravo.

Republicans trumpet Christianity from the highest hilltop and then
once in office act as if it's a label they paste on their lapels and
ignore completely in practice.

If it were up to me, it would be forbidden for a candidate to discuss
religion at all, from the moment they declare to the moment they leave
office. I'd trust an honest Atheist a lot sooner than a "Christian"
who isn't. Give me sincerity over show any day.

[Lord Helmet]

40. less than zero

I figure it's a parlor game for the Jesus junkies.

[Az]

43. The more faith they talk about the more worried I become

Doubt and uncertainty are signs of a reasoning mind. Critical thought balks at the idea of faith.

Personally I would love to see an atheist president but I will have to continue to rely on those with some faith that recognize and defend other belief's rights.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

47. generally I don't, unless

the candidate wears his religion on his sleeve, as it were. Last election, we had a candidate for Senate who put the fish symbol on all his posters and quoted the Bible incessantly. He promised to basically violate the First Amendment's admonition about separation of church and state. Even though I didn't like the DINO who was his opposition, I voted for him just to keep this right wing Republican theocrat out of office.

[Forkboy]

49. A little to some,no problem.

Some to a good portion,I worry.

A good portion to a whole lot,no vote.

[terrya]

50. Not important at all.

As we've seen, just because someone professes over and over and over again that they are religious and have "accepted Jesus Christ as my savior" as the current occupant of the Oval Office has done ad nauseum, doesn't mean that they are truly moral, ethical people.

[H2O Man]

51. It depends.

If they are interested in imposing their beliefs on others, like a president we can code-name "George W. Bush," then I do not want them elected. But if they attempt to keep their religion between themselves and their God, and only tend to talk about it in response to reporters questions, I have no concern what their particular faith is. And the same standards would apply to any candidates who did not have any religious beliefs.

[frustrated_lefty]

52. Totallt important if a goat is sacrificed.

[rasputin1952]

53. Depends...I don't want someone who believes in a FLat Earth...

or thinks that rocks can speak w/great wisdom and insight.

I recall the Kennedy debates on his Catholicism, and it was begun by RW pinheads that thought he would be beholding to the Pope instead of the Constitution...and he easily showed that he could be a Catholic and a patriotic American at the same time.

Just as now, people should be asking whether a candidate would support and defend the Constitution, or be beholding to the mandates of the RW Religious fools that are only looking for some kind of "glory" by destroying life on earth in he name of God. To me, there is no difference between an "infallible" Pope or an "infallible" fire breathing fundamentalist. Both are exceptionally dangerous, and should be exposed as frauds...no one is "infallable"...and just because someone calls themselves a Protestant, doesn't mean they don't aspire to being a pope-like figure of Dark Ages complete power.

I want a presidential candidate that can think on his/her feet, not follow some self-aggrandizing egomaniac that thinks he hears God behind every tree.

[gollygee]

55. So long as someone isn't wacky, I don't particularly care what religion they are or aren't

I might have trouble voting for a Scientologist though because I'd worry about someone who was that gullible.

[bklyncowgirl]

62. I would not vote for a fundamentalist of any denomination.

Anyone who believes that the Bible, or the Koran or the Torah or whatever is the literal, incontestable word of God will not get my vote.

Other than that I'll vote for persons of any faith or no faith as long as they appear to be reasonably decent human beings who have intelligence and a grasp on reality--or at least are better than the other schmuck which is more often the case.

[dave_p]

64. Very important that they haven't too much of it

The last thing you want is someone who thinks that however much they screw up, they & their supporters will be zapped up to heaven at the last moment. Sadly that's what we seem to have at the moment.

Faith can be a dangerous thing in a leader. I want them to make clear-headed decisions and know they're responsible for their actions, and there's no get-out-of-Armageddon-free card waiting for them.

There are plenty of moderate believers who know that, and see their religion as a command to do what's right in the circumstances. I'm cool with that provided their notion of what's right is near enough to mine.

A progressive atheist would be ideal, but the perversion of politics by the pseudo-religious right makes the success of such a candidacy unlikely unless they keep quiet about it, which is sickening.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

66. Yes, it is impt. to me. If the "faith" of the candidate interferes with the "faith" of others and

determines policy on that "faith".

[camero]

67. I view any candidate's faith with great skepticism

I want to see if thier actual policies conform with that faith. Which makes any candidate proclaiming to have spritual or religious values if you will while calling for not ending this war or an invasion of yet another country as a charlatan.

That includes Dems or Repubs.

[jwirr]

71. It is somewhat important to me. I want to know what his background

is and a church membership can give me insight into the persons thinking. In fact any type of membership shows me what kind of person I am supporting. This of course means that I need to know something about the beliefs and actions of the church/group in question. I need to know the history and involvement of the church/group to know where the person is coming from. I do not make a decision solely based on the religious background of anyone.

[Kazak]

82. Very, and I'd prefer as little as possible!

And, only where science hasn't already disseminated any need for faith.

[donco6]

98. I prefer it be nonexistent. But I make do. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

103. List of presidents by faith. For the most part, it seems meaningless.

Of course, none of them seemed to have any qualms on invoking the deity as an ally and they tended to become more prayerful when they got into trouble - usually of their own making.

1 George Washington Episcopalian
2 John Adams Congregationalist (raised); Unitarian
3 Thomas Jefferson raised Episcopalian; later no specific denomination
held Christian, Deist, Unitarian beliefs
4 James Madison Episcopalian (deist?)
5 James Monroe Episcopalian (deist?)
6 John Quincy Adams Unitarian
7 Andrew Jackson Presbyterian
8 Martin Van Buren Dutch Reformed
9 William Henry Harrison Episcopalian
10 John Tyler Episcopalian (deist)
11 James Knox Polk Presbyterian; Methodist
12 Zachary Taylor Episcopalian
13 Millard Fillmore Unitarian
14 Franklin Pierce Episcopalian
15 James Buchanan Presbyterian
16 Abraham Lincoln raised Baptist; later no specific denomination (deist)
17 Andrew Johnson Christian (no specific denomination)
18 Ulysses S Grant Presbyterian; Methodist
19 Rutherford B. Hayes Presbyterian; Methodist (?)
20 James A. Garfield Disciples of Christ
21 Chester A. Arthur Episcopalian
22 Grover Cleveland Presbyterian
23 Benjamin Harrison Presbyterian
24 Grover Cleveland Presbyterian
25 William McKinley Methodist
26 Theodore Roosevelt Dutch Reformed; Episcopalian
27 William Howard Taft Unitarian
28 Woodrow Wilson Presbyterian
29 Warren G. Harding Baptist
30 Calvin Coolidge Congregationalist
31 Herbert Hoover Quaker
32 Franklin Roosevelt Episcopalian
33 Harry S. Truman Southern Baptist
34 Dwight D. Eisenhower River Brethren; Jehovah's Witnesses; Presbyterian
35 John F. Kennedy Catholic
36 Lyndon B. Johnson Disciples of Christ
37 Richard M. Nixon Quaker
38 Gerald Ford Episcopalian
39 Jimmy Carter Baptist (former Southern Baptist)
40 Ronald Reagan Disciples of Christ; Presbyterian
41 George H. W. Bush Episcopalian
42 William Clinton Baptist
43 George W. Bush Methodist (former Episcopalian)

[cynatnite]

104. Nixon was a quaker?

My dog's head just exploded.

I am surprised at the number of unitarians.

[Philosoraptor]

105. You shouldn't subject your dog to dogma or politics.

My cat is indifferent, but the dog gets absolutely rabid over politics and religion.

[cynatnite]

113. I'll make sure he's out of the room next time :) n/t

[Az]

108. Jefferson thought

That Universalism would become the religion of the land. Guess he favored reason over dogma. Advocates of reason often forget that dogma likes to advertise a lot more than reason does. Sells better. Its much more exciting. But thats reason for you.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

110. Which is whoI thought of when I said religion was pretty meaningless.

His relationship to the tenets of Quakerism is akin to Britney Spears relationship to modesty.

[charlie]

111. Boggling, innit?

Speaking of dogs, Dicky once signed a letter to his mom, "Your Faithful Dog, Richard." The guy was seriously bent from the beginning.

[Orsino]

106. A candidate who talks too much about his/her faith...

...is trying to distract me and get away from the cameras. I have to be suspicious of anything else I hear.

[Ganja Ninja]

112. Their religion isn't all that important.

It's the amount of time they spend posturing about it that might put me off.

[MedleyMisty]

115. Well - I'd like to vote for an atheist

But until then, I have to vote straight Democrat and hope that none of them have a gleam of insanity in their eyes and that their face doesn't turn purple with rage and hate while they beat a Bible.

I know, I know, there are people who practice a religion but don't use it as a tool for hate. Unfortunately, not many of those people are in politics.

[blondeatlast]

119. It isn't at all unless they are hypocrites. FWIW, I'm Christian/UU. nt

[Canuckistanian]

121. Very important, actually

The more they mention it, the LESS LIKELY I am to vote for them.

[LeftishBrit]

128. Couldn't care less...

so long as the politician was prepared to treat everyone equally, and not advocate 'faith-based laws' or discrimination against citizens of other faiths or none. And so long as their brand of religion wasn't such as to inspire them to go into wars with 'God on their side'.

BTW, my own MP is openly atheist and an official in the National Secular Society, and this has never been made an issue. I think that even here it would be difficult for an open atheist to be Prime Minister, but I'm sure some atheists have been already without discussing the matter. Much less attention is paid to a PM's faith here than seems to be the case for candidates in America. The only way that it has come up recently, is that it's a fairly open secret that Blair is converting from C of E to Catholicism, but he hasn't been able to do so 'officially' while PM. Not that a Catholic couldn't be PM, but openly undergoing religious conversions while in office could create some awkwardness for a PM.

[Norquist Nemesis]

129. It only becomes important when they make it a #1 issue

or even a top 5. When a candidate's walking around talking about bringing God back (as if He's been banned), and ranting how the Constitution is Christian/Bible based, then, yes...it's very important and scary as hell!

[bleedingheart]

131. I believe in actions over words or faith

you can believe all you want in something...but if you don't follow through with the actions and living a good life..then it is worthless to me.

I would rather vote for an honest and good atheist than a bible thumping hypocrite who robs from the poor and feeds the rich...

[ComerPerro]

132. people want a candidate who will tell them the same lies they tell themselves

[Rob H.]

133. The more a candidate talks about how religious they are,

the less likely I am to vote for them because I find that kind of behavior creepy and off-putting (especially so now, thanks to the religionist nutjob in the WH). They should be more mindful that the name of the position is "President," not "Pastor."


Edit: missing "the."

[doggyboy]

135. as a very spiritual person

it doesnt mean squat. I prefer to judge a candidate on their deeds, not their words.

[Blue_In_AK]

136. I could give a care

A candidate's "faith" or lack thereof has no place in politics, IMO.

[Jonathan50]

137. Their faith matters not to me..

What matters is how they express that faith.

I'm reminded of the saying: "Don't tell me you're a Christian, let me figure it out".

I will not vote for anyone who publicly bleats constantly of their "faith".

I have a strong and abiding distrust of Pharisees.