Skip to comments.
Freep a Poll! (Should presidential nominee's religious beliefs be considered?)
www.onenewsnow.com ^
| 7-17-07
| One News Now
Posted on 07/18/2007 2:18:06 PM PDT by dynachrome
Should a presidential nominee's religious beliefs be considered during the confirmation process?
It should never come into play
Everything's fair game
For Christians, it is of the utmost importance
(Excerpt) Read more at onenewsnow.com ...
TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Miscellaneous; Religion
KEYWORDS: 2008; poll; primaries
I answered that everything is fair game. Religion would be a minor factor unless the candidate is a muslim. Then I would want to know a lot more background such as the type of mosque attended.
To: 2ndDivisionVet; A knight without armor; Alexander Rubin; AmericaUnite; Atlanta Conservative; ...
Interesting results. I seem to be in a minority on this poll.
FREEP THIS POLL ***PING!*** FRmail me if you want to be added or removed from the Fearless Poll-Freeping Freepers Ping list. And be sure to ping me to any polls that need Freepin', if I miss them. (looks like a medium volume list) (gordongekko909, founder of the pinglist, stays on the list until his ghost signs up for the list)
2
posted on
07/18/2007 2:19:24 PM PDT
by
dynachrome
(Henry Bowman is right.)
To: dynachrome
3
posted on
07/18/2007 2:21:28 PM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
To: dynachrome
Should a presidential nominee's religious beliefs be considered during the confirmation process? Only if they're different than mine.
To: dynachrome
Religion (in some people, nay...perhaps most) serves as their set of values and what is right vs what is wrong.
I think we have a duty to know how an elected official will use the religious principles that they believe in to determine what is "right" vs "wrong."
Fortunately, for most religions these values are relatively similar. And I think the difference between various denominations is minimal when it comes to the really big issues.
There used to be a time when "common sense" told us what was right and wrong, but there's just too many idjits today that have messed that up.
Under the right circumstances I'd vote for any mainstream Americanized religion. I would really be hesitant voting for a self-described atheist.
5
posted on
07/18/2007 2:31:07 PM PDT
by
MovieMogul
(I hate it when there's a typo in my tagline.)
To: MovieMogul
Scientology would probably be a no go for me, also.
You are right about the values deriving from religion, even if someone is not religious now, in the formal sense.
6
posted on
07/18/2007 2:36:03 PM PDT
by
dynachrome
(Henry Bowman is right.)
To: dynachrome
I voted No, Thanks for the lead
7
posted on
07/18/2007 2:37:30 PM PDT
by
muir_redwoods
(Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
To: MovieMogul
If I knew the Atheist had a good record over many years, I would vote for the atheist if a Christian judge had a history of bad decisions over the same timeframe.
After all, there are a surprising number of good conservative atheist FReepers lurking around here.
(BTW I’m a Christian myself)
8
posted on
07/18/2007 2:38:16 PM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
To: dynachrome
It should never come into play 199 (10.22%)
Everything’s fair game 133 (6.83%)
For Christians, it is of the utmost importance 1615 (82.95%)
9
posted on
07/18/2007 2:46:03 PM PDT
by
toldyou
To: muir_redwoods
I voted “Utmost Importance”, which it isn’t for me. However, I do believe that the continuous questions about faith are skewed as ballast for the Clinton’s lack of faith.
Absolute, unyielding lack of any moral guidance whatsoever, that is what the Clintons are, in essence. Anytime anyone brings up Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith, that is exactly my first thought. I don’t care that Romney is a devout Mormon. I do care that he has a steadfast belief in something.
10
posted on
07/18/2007 2:55:39 PM PDT
by
ishabibble
(ALL-AMERICAN INFIDEL)
To: dynachrome
Scientology would probably be a no go for me, also.
Good point.
11
posted on
07/18/2007 3:43:58 PM PDT
by
MovieMogul
(I hate it when there's a typo in my tagline.)
To: cripplecreek
If I knew the Atheist had a good record over many years, I would vote for the atheist if a Christian judge had a history of bad decisions over the same timeframe.
Interesting point. If given that circumstance, I'd likely vote for any third person running, or as I've done many times before, write my own name in the ballot.
12
posted on
07/18/2007 3:45:55 PM PDT
by
MovieMogul
(I hate it when there's a typo in my tagline.)
To: dynachrome
Religion no, but issues that are important to people of religion yes.
13
posted on
07/18/2007 3:46:03 PM PDT
by
mware
(By all that you hold dear..on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
To: MovieMogul
I use the old “Will he cut off my head” litmus test.
14
posted on
07/18/2007 3:47:44 PM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
To: mware
The reason I say no to the nominees religion being important is because many of the candidates who claim to be RC are far from practicing that faith.
I judge them by how they vote on issues important to people of faith, such as abortion, stem cell research, gay marriage, etc.
15
posted on
07/18/2007 3:49:35 PM PDT
by
mware
(By all that you hold dear..on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson