• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Vote for an atheist president (for religious people)

Would you vote for an atheist president with your views?

  • Yes, I would, his beliefs shouldn't matter

    Votes: 52 89.7%
  • No, he needs to believe in God, even if he agrees with me

    Votes: 6 10.3%

  • Total voters
    58
A presidents religious beliefs are absolutely meaningless to me as long as he can separate them from the reality of america. As long as he realizes HIS religion doesnt trump the rights, freedoms and liberties of americans.

If he can't do that then it matters immensely and i would never vote for him but not directly because of his religion it would be because he has no clue how to be president.
 
You're equating "Christian values" to "everything in the Bible," which is a stretch, but I will say that the message of the Bible is good.

How can "Christian values" and the bible be a stretch? Seriously just a few posts a go you said: "Christian values are good." If those values did not come from the bible, where did they come from?
 
How can "Christian values" and the bible be a stretch? Seriously just a few posts a go you said: "Christian values are good." If those values did not come from the bible, where did they come from?

From God Almighty.

Where is this going?
 
Im just trying to figure out what part of the bible has Christian values in it.

I respectfully disagree with Lizzie there.

Christians should be essentially Jews who believe in the divinity and message of Jesus Christ. Thus, every word of the Old Testament has a high degree of importance.

Christian values could be described as an amalgamation of church tradition, the gospel of Christ, and the law of Moses.
 
I respectfully disagree with Lizzie there.

Christians should be essentially Jews who believe in the divinity and message of Jesus Christ. Thus, every word of the Old Testament has a high degree of importance.

Christian values could be described as an amalgamation of church tradition, the gospel of Christ, and the law of Moses.
Church tradition? And you even mention Moses in the same sentence. Church tradition is a form of worshiping false idols.
 
Church tradition? And you even mention Moses in the same sentence. Church tradition is a form of worshiping false idols.

In no way is it a form of worshiping false idols. I don't know where you get these misinformed ideas.

Church tradition is our way of interpreting the words of the Bible; much of which was divinely inspired, but penned by human beings.
 
In no way is it a form of worshiping false idols. I don't know where you get these misinformed ideas.

Church tradition is our way of interpreting the words of the Bible; much of which was divinely inspired, but penned by human beings.
In other words fallacious heresy.
 
Well, since Google defines heresy as "Belief or opinion contrary to orthodox religious (esp. Christian) doctrine," I'd say that's evidently false.
Heresy | Define Heresy at Dictionary.com
1. opinion or doctrine at variance with the orthodox or accepted doctrine, especially of a church or religious system.
2. the maintaining of such an opinion or doctrine.
3. Roman Catholic Church . the willful and persistent rejection of any article of faith by a baptized member of the church.
4. any belief or theory that is strongly at variance with established beliefs, customs, etc.

At any rate my intent was to convey the out of bible context that church's assert to control their followers. Which is relevant since the Christian Right is trying to use the Christian Faith to control Americans. By you asserting that there is an out of bible bases that dictates morals indicates that those Christian morals that you are talking about came from humans not gods.
 
Heresy | Define Heresy at Dictionary.com
1. opinion or doctrine at variance with the orthodox or accepted doctrine, especially of a church or religious system.
2. the maintaining of such an opinion or doctrine.
3. Roman Catholic Church . the willful and persistent rejection of any article of faith by a baptized member of the church.
4. any belief or theory that is strongly at variance with established beliefs, customs, etc.

At any rate my intent was to convey the out of bible context that church's assert to control their followers. Which is relevant since the Christian Right is trying to use the Christian Faith to control Americans. By you asserting that there is an out of bible bases that dictates morals indicates that those Christian morals that you are talking about came from humans not gods.

Not really. It's an acceptance of the reality that the Bible, while divinely inspired, was chronicled by the hands of men.

The Gospel accounts were not written down until a generation after Christ. The modern Bible was not assembled until the year 331 at the earliest.

The books of Moses were inscribed from oral tradition around 600 BC, and compiled in to a book around 400 BC. (Moses himself lived around 1400 BC)

The printing press was not around until 1440 AD. Before then, very few owned Bibles. (Very few were literate as well...)

Oral tradition and rabbinical/church interpretation and tradition are older and more established methods of understanding the faith than the written bible.

Consider this. If the book itself were so important, why did Jesus preach and not write? Why didn't Jesus write his own gospel?
 
Last edited:
Not really. It's an acceptance of the reality that the Bible, while divinely inspired, was chronicled by the hands of men.

The Gospel accounts were not written down until a generation after Christ. The modern Bible was not assembled until the year 331 at the earliest.

The books of Moses were inscribed from oral tradition around 600 BC, and compiled in to a book around 400 BC. (Moses himself lived around 1400 BC)

The printing press was not around until 1440 AD. Before then, very few owned Bibles. (Very few were literate as well...)

Oral tradition and rabbinical/church interpretation and tradition are older and more established methods of understanding the faith than the written bible.

Consider this. If the book itself were so important, why did Jesus preach and not write? Why didn't Jesus write his own gospel?
Odd... I am usually the one pointing out those facts to theists. Do you realize that you undermined the need for Judeo-Christian Roots? What you have established (much better then I was) that Christianity is built on words of men. You discredited the bible so much that it is unreliable as a religious doctrine. Man has defined morality himself so it is obvious that Atheists do not need religion to be moral.

Indeed why didnt Jesus write the gospel?
 
Odd... I am usually the one pointing out those facts to theists. Do you realize that you undermined the need for Judeo-Christian Roots? What you have established (much better then I was) that Christianity is built on words of men. You discredited the bible so much that it is unreliable as a religious doctrine. Man has defined morality himself so it is obvious that Atheists do not need religion to be moral.

Indeed why didnt Jesus write the gospel?

Not at all. It sounds like you have dealt with a lot of Protestants (Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists, etc).

I was raised Lutheran, but I consider myself more aligned with the Catholic Church.

Protestants believe something called sola scriptura, which places the highest authority on the Bible. Martin Luther, the founder of the protestant movement, is a product of the printing press age. He reasoned that if everyone has access to a Bible, why should the Church have a monopoly on God?

He claimed the Bible was infallible, and the Church was therefore irrelevant. He broke off and formed his own sect.

Catholics believe as I answered you, and have for two millenia.
 
Indeed why didnt Jesus write the gospel?

He established the Church.

He had 12 disciples. He told them: "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

Matthew 16:18 - And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
 
That has echoes in the current furore over Mormon baptism of the dead. Evangelism is about giving people something they neither want nor need, because you know better what that is.
 
Christian values are good.
They are values of compassion, not necessarily tied to one religion. And I think the secular Enlightenment values are what will guide our country.
 
Last edited:
They are values of compassion, not necessarily tied to one religion. And I think the secular Enlightenment values are what will guide our country.

Only until they monetarily break us.
 
They are values of compassion, not necessarily tied to one religion. And I think the secular Enlightenment values are what will guide our country.

The substance of the message is of far greater importance than the label.
 
The substance of the message is of far greater importance than the label.
But then to say that America is founded upon "Christian" values is fallacious, as America has also been founded on secular Enlightenment values as well, and those of Greek philosophy.

Sure, I believe that a lot of nonreligious values that are considered "Christian" such as kindness to your fellow man, peace, and helping the poor are all great. I am an atheist however, so I believe that these ideas must have come about some other way. Indeed, Greek philosophers and Aesop had came up with many values of justice before Christ existed.

I don't like the reverence of authority (I think everybody should take claims, even those from authority, with a grain of salt until evidence/logic prove that the claim is rational) and the idea that unnatural = bad. Those values I can dump.

There are also a lot of values that actually emerged as a result of the Scientific Revolution. Ever since Ptolemy people had believed that the Earth was the center of the universe, and that everything else revolved around it. Of course, the Catholic Church would support this, because the idea that the universe revolves around Earth goes nicely with the idea that God decides how things run. The kings would support this as well, because it fits neatly with the Divine Right of Kings. However, when Copernicus said that Earth was not the center, and Galileo not only helped prove this but discovered that there is a whole universe beyond our planet, this contradicted not only geocentric ideas but the idea that God interferes in politics. Newton discovering gravity proved that there are natural, and not supernatural, explanations for things, which also contradicted the ruling class. Is it any wonder why Galileo was put under house arrest? His ideas were literally dangerous to the hegemony of the Church. Once people looked at these ideas they started to question what gave kings their right to rule in the first place, and so you have John Locke, Voltaire, etc, and their ideas of democracy, equality and the rule of law. These were not Christian values; in fact, questioning things is taboo, and the Church actively opposed and condemned its critics.
 
Back
Top Bottom