Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No Atheists (Still) Need Apply
Washington Post ^ | Susan Jacoby

Posted on 12/28/2006 4:15:11 PM PST by quesney

In nearly every interview about my book, Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism,I am asked whether I am an atheist or an agnostic. The bias--a profoundly American bias--implicit in this question is that only an "unbeliever" would want to write a historical work about the secular influences on the founding and development of our nation.

[...]

What we ought to be talking about are decent human values that can be subscribed to by Americans of any faith or no faith. I could not care less whether any elected official believes in God: I care about what he or she does on earth. As an atheist, I believe precisely what the Bible says on this subject: "By their fruits ye shall know them."

(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: agnostics; atheism; atheists; deists; discrimination; theists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-116 next last
To: Freedom_no_exceptions
In that case, my election-day policy is "atheists only."

OK...fair enough.At least we each know where the other stands.

21 posted on 12/28/2006 5:19:46 PM PST by Gay State Conservative ("The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism."-Karl Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: quesney
speaking openly about atheism works to dispel the notion that atheists have horns.

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.

22 posted on 12/28/2006 5:20:21 PM PST by SamuraiScot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gunny Gene
Good policy. Silence is my first choice, then if I am nagged for an opinion, I politely explain that it's not their personal business what I believe or don't believe. I even did this in high school, and some teachers took it as arrogance -- to have an opinion and keep it to yourself. (Oh my!)

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....
23 posted on 12/28/2006 5:20:45 PM PST by SteveMcKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer
Why would anyone want to make a point of being an atheist unless he wants to start a fight?

QED.

24 posted on 12/28/2006 5:20:56 PM PST by Wormwood (I'm with you in Rockland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Freedom_no_exceptions

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.


25 posted on 12/28/2006 5:25:39 PM PST by Mad Dawg (Now we are all Massoud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer

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?


26 posted on 12/28/2006 5:28:26 PM PST by Mad Dawg (Now we are all Massoud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

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.


27 posted on 12/28/2006 5:29:34 PM PST by ShadowDancer (No autopsy, no foul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Freedom_no_exceptions

(I catch up on sleep at work, like all decent people ...)


28 posted on 12/28/2006 5:30:16 PM PST by Mad Dawg (Now we are all Massoud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

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.


29 posted on 12/28/2006 5:31:43 PM PST by Freedom_no_exceptions (No actual, intended, or imminent victim = no crime. No exceptions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SteveMcKing

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.


30 posted on 12/28/2006 5:32:42 PM PST by Gunny Gene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ShadowDancer
This thread kills me.

This thread (and the myriad just like it) makes me wonder why I bothered giving the GOP my money and support for so long.

31 posted on 12/28/2006 5:32:56 PM PST by Wormwood (I'm with you in Rockland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Freedom_no_exceptions

10-4


32 posted on 12/28/2006 5:33:52 PM PST by Mad Dawg (Now we are all Massoud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg
(I catch up on sleep at work, like all decent people ...)

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 : )

33 posted on 12/28/2006 5:35:14 PM PST by Freedom_no_exceptions (No actual, intended, or imminent victim = no crime. No exceptions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Wormwood

Yep, that's why I don't.


34 posted on 12/28/2006 5:36:05 PM PST by ShadowDancer (No autopsy, no foul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Freedom_no_exceptions
My original point was to use an extreme example to show that religious tests for public office are not a good idea.

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.

35 posted on 12/28/2006 5:36:18 PM PST by Wormwood (I'm with you in Rockland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: sodpoodle; metmom; Dr. Eckleburg
agnostics... Just today I read that the word was invented by Aldous Huxley. He and others gave financial support to Charles Darwin with the express purpose of creating a new humanist religion.
36 posted on 12/28/2006 5:36:36 PM PST by 1000 silverlings (stand up, stand up for Jesus, ye soldiers of the Cross)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 1000 silverlings

Seriously, why do you care?


37 posted on 12/28/2006 5:37:56 PM PST by ShadowDancer (No autopsy, no foul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ShadowDancer
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'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.

38 posted on 12/28/2006 5:38:52 PM PST by Gay State Conservative ("The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism."-Karl Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ShadowDancer

Thought people would be interested where and how the term originated. No need to get your panties in a tight


39 posted on 12/28/2006 5:39:13 PM PST by 1000 silverlings (stand up, stand up for Jesus, ye soldiers of the Cross)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: All

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.”
 


40 posted on 12/28/2006 5:42:04 PM PST by EdJay (A)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-116 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson