An Atheist President

[opus10no2]

Is it possible to be a leader and openly have no religious faith?

[gyzzzmo]

Not in America at least. If you want to become a president there, during election you can only say what people want to hear, whether its wise or dumb. It doesnt matter what you really think as a president, as long as the appearance is right.

'The first black president' is a laugh, it will take many centuries before a non-christian president will be elected in that country.

[pianistimo]

?  It's already happened.  I think it's really funny that you are explaining it JUST AS IT IS.  The Christian's of the USA don't want an Athiest President.  Why?  It compromises the constitution because the constitution was founded around the principle of 'government FOR the people.'  Not government TELLING the people.  Where do we get this right (which btw, OVERRULES intellectual property law)?  The bible!

[gyzzzmo]

?  It's already happened.  I think it's really funny that you are explaining it JUST AS IT IS.  The Christian's of the USA don't want an Athiest President.  Why?  It compromises the constitution because the constitution was founded around the principle of 'government FOR the people.'  Not government TELLING the people.  Where do we get this right (which btw, OVERRULES intellectual property law)?  The bible!

Then you have to explain me why it generally considered to be wise to keep church and politics seperated?

[morningstar]

Not again...can we PLEASE try to keep politics and religion separate here pianistimo? You do have a right to post, freedom of speech. However it is wearing between posts with religion/politics intertwined and the replies. Take it easy please?

[concerto_love]

It's impossible in my country because my country is based on 'religion'... one of the fatal criteria of the president is she/he has faith and doing his/her faith... XP

[kelly_kelly]

It's funny, my friends and I were talking about the results of the US election and this issue came up. We were all happy, but most of my friends were much more excited than I was, staying up late to celebrate and being unable to think of anything else. I said that what would truly excite me would be a president of a different religion. They responded by saying religion wasn't as big a boundary as race and accusing me of cynicism. Which utterly baffles me. I don't think there are even too many congress-people who are non-Christian! The separation of church and state is not too great here (Exhibit A: Pianistimo).

[ramseytheii]

Apparently, according to recent polls, the atheist population of USA is 16%, which is a higher percentage than African-Americans (according to this one poll).  The point the pundit was making was, that they could be a substantial voting block in the future.  I think if the government of USA is government for the people, very soon we will start to be represented by people who do not have a religious faith.  The Constitution says that nobody can undergo religious tests to obtain office, but obviously there is an unofficial examination that goes on every election cycle of a person's faith.

Religion as a wedge issue diminished this year: Obama was very open and eloquent about his Christianity in ways that John Kerry was not, and it diffused a lot of the anticipated so-called evangelical voices, which were mercifully silent this year (the contradiction between free market zealots and Christian fundamentalists was revealed in the economic collapse, when it was evident that Christians had no response for it, and the so-called free market zealots didn't either.  The true zealots did have a response: let it play out.)

Also, in North Carolina, the once-respectable Elizabeth Dole who for many years led the Red Cross, ran an ad faking the voice of her opponent saying "There is no God."  After being sued for defamation by her Sunday school teacher opponent, she handily lost the race to people who are sick and tired of seeing people use religion as a way to inspire fear and hatred.  She lost more than the race, unfortunately: she also lost her reputation.  Something about the Republican party just does that to people, it seems!

Walter Ramsey

[mikey6]

Not again...can we PLEASE try to keep politics and religion separate here pianistimo? You do have a right to post, freedom of speech. However it is wearing between posts with religion/politics intertwined and the replies. Take it easy please?

While I agree, it's gonna be slightly difficult when the topic is wound up in politics and religion 

[richard black]

The Christians [sic - no apostrophe in plurals] of the USA don't want an Athiest President.

Well, of course not. It might make them face up to some unpleasant home truths.

[shortyshort]

All I say is that,

it's a good job that Britain can not have a Catholic Prime Minister.

[richard black]

it's a good job that Britain can not have a Catholic Prime Minister.

I thought we just did.

[shortyshort]

I thought we just did.

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm

[minor9th]

I'm waiting for a Satanist--at least you know where you stand with them! 

[comsmcsc]

?  It's already happened.  I think it's really funny that you are explaining it JUST AS IT IS.  The Christian's of the USA don't want an Athiest President.  Why?  It compromises the constitution because the constitution was founded around the principle of 'government FOR the people.'  Not government TELLING the people.  Where do we get this right (which btw, OVERRULES intellectual property law)?  The bible!

We don't get this "right" from the Bible.  Our fundamental freedoms set forth in the Bill of Rights and amendments to the US Constitution provide us with certain freedoms including the freedom to worship as we wish and sets forth the framework for the three branches of our government.  While we have the freedom to worship God, we also have the freedom not to worship God.  That is what makes the US the "Land of the Free".  The separation of Church and State is also important.