What About Kerry And The Atheist Vote?

MICHNEWS.COM ^ | NOVEMBER 9, 2004 | DR. PAUL KENGOR

[CHARLITE]

While liberals complain about the religious vote that went for George W. Bush, they refuse to discuss—and perhaps happily accept—the non-religious vote that went for John F. Kerry. Which ought to be considered a greater liability for an American president: to receive the overwhelming support of devout Protestants and Catholics or to be backed by atheists? Which speaks worse? Don’t we have this backward?

We’re hearing plenty about President Bush’s huge advantage in the 2004 election from evangelicals, and (less so) about the extremely significant fact that Catholics who attend Mass weekly voted for Bush by 55% to 44%, which is a startling religious rejection of John Kerry, a Catholic. Yet, the one aspect of the November 2 vote that is being completely ignored is the behavior not of the most devout but the least devout.

[Dashing Dasher]

I personal resent when people assume that because I am politically conservative, that I am also religious.

I am an atheist/agnostic but I have no problem with the Ten Commandments in public buildings and Santa Claus.

While I think it's GREAT that this country has a moral values - my moral values have nothing to do with a bible.

Atheists for Bush? Why not!?

[VastRWCon]

I wish all the kids in my neighborhood had God, faith, a strong moral background... maybe we would have less crime around here. UNDERSTAND my LIBERAL neighbors?

[starfish923]

I listened to Ray Flynn this morning, former mayor of Boston and Ambassabor to the Vatican.

One stat, he said, that came out of the election:
In the state of Massachusetts, Kerry got the Catholic vote ONLY 51-48%. That was WAY, WAY lower than expected.
Almost half the Catholics in SKerry's home state voted for Bush.

[Moriartys Mycroft]

I'm an atheist who voted straight Republican. I also happen to attend church every Sunday with the family.

[cynicom]

I dont think too many people here knew or cared about your beliefs. Therefore resentment is falsely assumed.

[Dashing Dasher]

I didn't mean you - or those here.
I meant in general.

[cynicom]

OK....

[Innisfree]

They are who they are, and they are contemptuous of those religious “morals” voters who beat them on November 2, whom they view as stupid.

There are many decent, churchgoing and atheistic Democrats who would never dream of belittling religious conservatives for their beliefs, but at the core of the Democratic party is a contempt for religion, Christianity in particular. To the Party elite, "supernaturalists" are atavistic reptiles.

The author makes a good point: it's time to turn this rhetoric on its head, to label the "literalists" for what they are.

[Names Ash Housewares]

I'm not religious. I have been voting Republican since Ronald Reagan. I am against taking down crosses, monkeying around with the Pledge of Allegiance, removing the ten commandments. I understand the power of symbols. I understand the ramifications of attacking the pillars the country was founded on. This country is about freedom. One reason people came here is freedom from religious persecution. I am completely assured of separation of church and state in America. I appreciate what these things represent in our society. There is an irrational fear of "holy rollers" by liberals. I believe that liberals simply would attack anyone who stand in their way of their socialist agenda. Most Christians oppose liberalism. So therefore they take the arrows.

[dodgerfury]

I am a liberal, and religious. I do not agree with the removal of the cross from Los Angeles City Seal. It has always been there and is part of history of California.