- Joined
- Apr 29, 2013
- Messages
- 6,081
- Reaction score
- 3,216
- Location
- Benghazi
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
What other jobs would you bar us from?
Any position where my rights are subject to your faith.
What other jobs would you bar us from?
Wouldn't an atheist president be the ideal choice to lead the country? In fact, shouldn't we require our elected officials to forsake religion in order to better serve us and uphold the separation of Church and State?
This is funny Pasch. You're trying to convince me that atheists would not seek to pass laws antagonistic to religion all while saying I'd totally deserve it and have it coming if they did. You can't tell me that someone with that much hostility wouldn't take the opportunity every so often to "stick it" to those of us you refer to as evil (I didn't know atheists believed in the concept of "evil"). The OP of this very thread would bar Christians from holding public office. Wonder what other jobs he'd keep us out of.
Yes, because everything you've ever said about religion and the religious has been nothing but reasoned criticism. Tell me again how delusional and insane I am. It's funny you bring up global warming. I think that's as much of a religion as anything and it's believers sure as hell do want to pass laws enforcing their own morality. For some reason though, that's ok with you.
Any position where my rights are subject to your faith.
Our Constitution specifically forbids any "religious test" for office. That would include a test of not having any religion, so this is a non-starter.
In brief, hell no.
People have belief in all sorts of things, not just religion, and are always trying to pass laws imposing those beliefs on others. Religion is no different and no worse.
And yet Christians insist on this very test.
As long as you can back up your reasoning with a coherent argument, and not a supernatural one, I welcome people with differing viewpoints to participate in government. That's real democracy, and not wink-and-a-nod theocracy.
What people vote for, and what is required to run for or hold office officially, is two different things.
Lol, yes, you do seem perfectly welcoming of different views in politics just not for people who have religious views. You are, indeed, the picture of tolerance.
Should Christians be barred from voting as well?
That would be silly. Christians should be able to vote for the same secular candidates as everyone else.
How about eating in restaurants? Would that be ok? Could we sit at the front of the bus?
Evangelicals believe in a literal reading of the Bible. Unless you're an EINO.
That's all you had to say?
What is an EINO? I don't get the acronym.
Voted no in accordance with the OP's beliefs.
The President is still a citizen of the United States and has the right to freedom of religion.
I, however, would prefer to vote for a non-religious President. The "god told me so" justification has been used a disturbing amount by Presidents in our short history.
"Agnostic" is a weasel word. Most atheists are "agnostics" in this sense: of course believing that there's no gods is a mental disorder, not any kind of -ism.
Not sure why you voted no to an atheist president if you prefer an atheist or non-religious president. However, it's your dime, as they say.
Amadeus said:In fact, shouldn't we require our elected officials to forsake religion in order to better serve us and uphold the separation of Church and State?
And yet Christians insist on this very test.
Do you have reading comprehension problems?
You had two questions in your OP, I answered this one because it's much more important:
If you want a straight answer then make a straight question.