Posted on 12/28/2006 4:15:11 PM PST by quesney
OK...fair enough.At least we each know where the other stands.
Oh yeah, we tried atheism in the French, Russian, and Chinese Communist revolutions, and you remember how well that worked out.
I trust an atheist in public office to have deep issues with his earthly father, perverting his ability to understand his heavenly Father.
An atheist is someone who seeks to replace God with . . . himself. I think that shows a poor understanding of the qualifications demanded by the job.
As for what people think of us, take a lesson from my dear old English teacher:
"When you are young, you worry what others think of you. When you are older, you don't. When you are really old, you realize that nobody is thinking of you."I suppose I just proved him wrong in a way, the old dingbat....
QED.
Can Buddhists or Jews vote in these elections or run as candidates? Is there a prohibition just against atheism? I would have guessed you would have had to be a Muslim, but I'm wrong a lot.
Well, couldn't an atheist who believed in personal integrity and who thought being reasonable was important or even a duty AND who thought it was reasonable to be an atheist -- couldn't such a person not only be one but be willing to say s/he was one?
This thread kills me. You fools would vote for someone of 'religion' over someone who has proven themselves. The bible thumping is annoying at best.
(I catch up on sleep at work, like all decent people ...)
Of course, I assume these elections are limited only to Muslim males. Jews (and atheists) are officially banned from Saudi Arabia, and Buddhists may be as well (at best, grudgingly tolerated). My original point was to use an extreme example to show that religious tests for public office are not a good idea.
Your English teacher apparently had some wisdom. Good to know that it was passed on to at least one of his/her? students.
Have a good , and interesting, life.
This thread (and the myriad just like it) makes me wonder why I bothered giving the GOP my money and support for so long.
10-4
Then YOU'RE the one I want in public office! Better to sleep all day than rob us of our freedoms and loot our paychecks : )
Yep, that's why I don't.
You needn't bother---the Founding Fathers understood that religious tests were complete crap over 200 years ago.
If someone still fails to understand that such a practice is an odious affront to our Republic, then they are probably immune to reason.
Seriously, why do you care?
I'm no "bible thumper",my friend.A belief in some power or being greater than him/herself...or the willingness to acknowledge the possibility that such a power/being exists..is but one of many requirements that I have before I give a candidate my vote.
IMO,atheism....the absolute conviction that there's no God...indicates a breathtaking,and disturbing,lack of humility.
That bothers me...a lot.It doesn't seem to bother you.C'est la guerre.
Thought people would be interested where and how the term originated. No need to get your panties in a tight
Thomas Jefferson:
“Our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, more than on our opinions in physics and geometry....The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
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.