Could you vote for an atheist for President?

Agreed.

 

You mean like Christians?

- - - Updated - - -

Actually agnostics are more rational than either.

 

Actually I would like to see all those politicians who profess to faith be required to take lie detector tests. Faith is a prerequisite for office in this country but professing it doesn't mean believing it in the political arena.

 

There are at least two types of atheists.

One does not believe there are any gods. The other, perhaps better characterized as the a-theist, just doesn't concern herself with speculating about the matter.

Most politicians profess to be borderline atheists, denying the existence of all the gods but for a single, token exception.

Whether they are telling the truth, only the gods know.

However, chances are that, if a politician professes to be an atheist (of either ilk,) she is being truthful.

 

we did change the salute, it used to be Hitler like remember, so we changed it

 

Maybe. It's really just politics. If an Atheist shared my politics then I'd have no issue voting for them. If they didnt, then no I wouldn't vote for them.

Race religion etc. Doesn't much matter, it'd mostly about shared political ideals.

 

Nice yo.. I'll promote a "czar" of "Christianity" to determain who is "Christian" and who isn't. You'll go far in the new global socialist police state.

 

So you don't think Christianity is a cult?

cult
kəlt/
noun
a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object.


a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing.

synonyms: obsession with, fixation on, mania for, passion for, idolization of, devotion to, worship of, veneration of

a person or thing that is popular or fashionable, especially among a particular section of society.

 

I would, by far, prefer a secular humanist (atheist) as president to any president that holds any religious beliefs.

 

I am with the great presidents of our nation's history who have weighed in regarding this. George Washington said, "It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible." James Madison once remarked, "The future and success of America is not in this Constitution, but in the laws of God upon which this Constitution is founded." James Monroe declared, "Before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe." Jimmy Carter admitted, "You can't divorce religious belief and public service." And Ronald Reagan rightly opined, "If we ever forget that we are one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under."

The Bible, too, speaks about this issue, saying, "Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord" (Psalm 33:12). Now while that verse is referring to ancient Israel, which lived under a theocracy, imagine the opposite sentiment directed at us: "Unblessed is the nation whose god is none." So much for "God Bless America," "One Nation Under God," and "In God We Trust," if our very highest elected representative believes none of that "nonsense" and governs accordingly by our own consent. We may have a fickle nation that debates God's identity, but it overwhelmingly expresses an acceptance that he's out there and takes an active concern regarding us corporately and individually. How then could we just chalk it all up and say, "It doesn't matter; God doesn't matter, just as long as we can vote in the next most ethnically distinct, sexually particular, and politically beholding individual to be our 'divine' ruler"?

If we are so slack in our spiritual concerns (merely giving lip-service to God without ever searching for him, living for him, or obeying him) we may well one day be led by a Fuehrer who hates the God we ourselves have hated by ambivalence. If we are to be remotely rescued, we must at least vote for the lesser of all evils, and atheism is one of the worst — and most foolish (Psalm 14:1).

The Rev. Bryan Griem
Montrose Community Church
Montrose
http://www.burbankleader.com/tn-blr...an-atheist-president-20150407,0,1536681.story

 

They are not mutually exclusive.

Then they are not atheist.

 

I don't presume to divine others' attitudes regarding the gods.

Atheists can pretend to believe in them, and professed believers may actually be atheists.

 

If he/she was a militant atheist cry baby, like the ones who go into convolsions over nonsense like pledges, and "in God we trust" on money, no.

If that person could careless about religion like I do, then I wouldn't have a problem.

 

http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/history_of_the_separation_of_chu.htm

"When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.
- Benjamin Franklin

- - - Updated - - -

Theocracies are evil by nature.....

 

Hitler views on a Christian nation

 

I would be just as upset if one wanted to put "In No God we trust" in our pledge as one that says "In God we Trust"

the gov should not be forcing it's view on the people either way, they should remain neutral in the matter

I do not think a Christians that was against "In No God we Trust" should be called a militant Christian cry baby anymore then the other

I think the pledge should represent ALL Americans, not just those that believe or don't believe in a God

.

 

You realize that people like you and I are a small minority, and the vast majority of people are religious, right?

 

you realize the pledge should represent all Americans and not just the majority right?

there was no reason to change it from a pledge the represent everyone to one that only represented theists...

.

 

Does it seriously make you suffer that the currency says in god we trust? Seriously?

 

I like how you include "are vegetarians" in with all those other things....

 

Ooops, a little of my biases slipped out

But, let's face it, believing that all atheists are evil is just as stupid as believing they're all vegetarians...(not that there's anything wrong with vegetarians, some of my best friends are vegetarians and they have a legal right to get married....)

 

IMO, people that label themselves as agnostic are just too timid to admit that they are atheist.

 

I'm sue that no one agonizes over it, but you are missing the point of why some people are uncomfortable with it.

 

No, we're just comfortable admitting we don't *know*.

There is no way to prove/disprove the existence of God, as God is defined.

Logically speaking, you are thus justified in concluding that God does not exist, due to lack of evidence. But that is different from *knowing* or *proving* he doesn't exist.

An agnostic is someone who shrugs their shoulders and says "Does God exist? Don't know. Don't care. Maybe I'll find out when I'm dead." And then gets on with their life.

 

Your last line can easily apply to an atheist's outlook too.