Posted on 09/26/2020 8:36:02 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Yes, otherwise you are a hypocrite.
The Constitution is a wonderful compromise document that protects religion broadly while not favoring any one religion or imposing religious beliefs on skeptics.
faith influences everything. Just like water is wet.
Of course it is. If you can swear on a Koran, one nation under God, in whom we trust, treat the pope as if he were the leader of a country, carry a bible to the helicopter like Bill Clinton or be an open hijab wearing Muslim in congress? It isn’t even a question.
Is it OK for people’s institutionally indoctrinated hatred for the Constitution influence their role in public office?” That’s the better question imo.
Send "Orange Man Bad" federal and state government desperate Democrats home in November!
Supporting PDJT with a new patriot Congress and state government leaders that will promise to fully support his already excellent work for MAGA and stopping SARS-CoV-2 will effectively give fast-working Trump a "third term" in office imo.
I don’t see any problem with voting Republican ticket for 2020 elections.
Insights welcome.
Like Bobby sang, “You’re gonna have to serve somebody.”
It is not “okay.” It is mandatory if your faith is faith and not just a pose.
Hmmmm, We started out with just 10 laws, All subsequent Laws descend from those 10 laws and are dependent on the existence of those 10 laws
Yes, except for people whose religion tells them to slice heads and throw people off buildings.
“Question: How should a person’s religious faith, or lack thereof factor into their fitness for office?”
Legally, religion should NOT be a factor, per the Constitution.
“After requiring all federal and state legislators and officers to swear or affirm to support the federal Constitution, Article VI specifies that ‘no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.’”
Those without *religious* beliefs let their own belief system influence their decisions, so why not?
The no God position is not a neutral one. There can be no neutral when there are only two choices.
OF COURSE!
Would you vote for a devout Muslim for president?
I WOULDN’T!
Would you vote for a devout Scientologist for president?
I WOULDN’T!
Would you vote for a devout Satanist for president?
I WOULDN’T!
Would you vote for an Atheist/Agnostic for president?
I WOULDN’T!
But Americans would vote for Devout Marxists to be Mayor, Congressman, Senator and perhaps even President.
Americans would also vote for devout earth worshipers to Congress.
What a silly question. Whether it is ok or not the fact is there isn’t a way religious faith can not be an influence in any ones lives.
Another writer with way too much time on his hands.
It doesn't.
Remember the little phrase in the Constitution about there being no religious test for office?
As we anticipate President Trump’s nomination of a candidate to replace the late Associate Justice Ruth Ginsburg on the Supreme Court, this is a valid and relevant question to ask.
See above.
I take it that Richard never had a Civics class otherwise he would know this.
No need to waste your time reading any further.
Last night, I listened to a news report, where the liberal praised Ginsberg, talking about how her religious upbringing influenced her rulings. This week, I’ve seen articles about how Biden’s deep Catholicism influenced him.
You need to read the Bible again. There were laws already in place before the 10 Commandments were given. 10 laws? Bah! And you think you know your Bible. Don’t spout crap you know nothing about.
Richard Land....no thanks
The whole top tier of recent SBC leadership leaves the same taste in my mouth Wayne LaPierre does nowadays
Yes, our country was founded on Judea-Christian values. Enough said.
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.