My ideal Presidential candidate would be a Black/Hispanic/Arabic lesbian transwoman, who was a secular Atheist, pro-choice, pro-marriage equality, and a registered Independent. Oh man. I would cry if such a woman existed and demand she lead my country.
This. One thing I always wondered about this kind of attitude. Are you a secluar atheist? An atheist preferring an atheist (in my view) is the same thing as a Christian preferring a Christian (or whatever). Both circumstances are quite understandable, we naturally tend to gravitate towards people like us. Which is why I ask whether you are a secular atheist (though that term is kind of redundant, and if you don't feel comfortable revealing this, I understand). I watched the Thanksgiving Family Forum today with most of the candidates (Romney and the other guy didn't show up) and Gingrich was talking about how he "wouldn't be comfortable with an atheist president." I'm just interested in this phenomenon. Should it matter what religion a person is, so long as they stand for what is right? What if Ron Paul was an atheist? Would his supporters think he was more crazy? Or would he have more supporters? Some of his views would probably change, though.
Just some food for thought. Hope that wasn't offensive or controversial.
Not offensive or controversial at all! I'm all for discussing my political views.
Yes, I am a secular atheist (and hahaha, yeah, it's a touch redundant). Honestly, no, I don't really care what religious views a person holds, so long as their political views aren't geared toward stripping another person of their rights, or in support of something I don't agree with. Unfortunately, a lot of the time Christian "values" (in politics, at least) include denying same-sex couples the right to marry or adopt children, restriction of birth control and the closure of Planned Parenthood, making abortion illegal, and teaching Christian history in schools (AKA Creationism) when it is a clear violation of the separation of church and state, and these are all things I have very strong opinions against. As someone who was raised by non-religious parents in a liberal city, I don't personally see why allowing same-sex couples to marry is even a concern in a modern and enlightened society like the US is supposed to be; I know that Planned Parenthood does far more than just provide abortions, such as providing birth control and birth control options to women and men who may otherwise not be able to afford it, test for and treat STDs, screen for breast, testicular, and cervical cancers, test for pregnancy and give pregnancy counseling, treat menopause, perform vasectomies, etc; and since I am not at all religious it didn't (and doesn't) sit very well with me that in my sophomore year of high school, my biology teacher (who was not a religious man) was forced to teach Creationism alongside Evolution in class, and even then the whole lesson and overview was kept as brief as possible, as not to offend. As someone who loves science, especially biology, I was intensely frustrated that we couldn't spend more time on it, since evolution is an extremely fascinating area of scientific study and I hated feeling like I was missing out. As for abortion, while it's obviously not going to be said in the bible that abortion is against Christianity (and let's be honest, God himself is not exactly guiltless of infanticide in scripture), it's vilified primarily by the religious right (who are, by a vast majority, Christian). I believe that a woman's body is hers to do with as she pleases, and if for whatever reason she does not want to give birth to the fetus growing inside her, she does not have to, and should not be forced to. Do I think abortions should be used as birth control? Hell no. Do I think they're something that should at all be taken lightly? Hell no. Are they something that should be avoided if it at all possible? Absolutely. However, if a woman does not want to give birth, she will likely find a way to have an abortion-- whether it is legal or not. I would rather it be kept safe and available than put women's lives in danger by making them resort to extremes.
I'm going to clarify and say this: I DO NOT THINK ALL CHRISTIANS BELIEVE THIS OR HOLD THESE OPINIONS. I would absolutely vote for a Christian, so long as they were pro-choice, pro-equality, and secular, because these are things that are important to me, just like I would not vote for an atheist who was against them. Really, the only reason I say my ideal presidential candidate is an atheist is because a) I'm an atheist and I think having an atheist in office would be extremely awesome, b) on paper, every single US president has, so far, been Christian (I say "on paper" because there is significant debate about the real religious leanings of several of the founding fathers, and I am personally of the opinion that many were actually deists), and c) I personally don't think that religion has any place in the US government, which was founded and built upon secularism. That said, I would also be super thrilled about a Muslim president. Or a Jewish president. Or a Buddhist president. Or a Pagan president. Or a Deist president. Really, I'd just like to mix up the religious atmosphere in US politics, which has unfairly been centered around Christianity for far too long for a country that is supposed to be secular and open to all religious views, and non-discriminatory based on those views.
Which segues into my next point, though this is more personal and less political: there is a definite stigma against atheists in the US today. Atheists were polled as the
most distrusted minority in America, which to me is both shocking and yet completely expected. As George H.W. Bush was quoted in saying,
"No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God." An atheist president would also no doubt help the atheist movement, where so many people are
afraid to "come out of the closet" with their beliefs (warning: article contains swearing), and I don't feel I need to mention again that discrimination against another person based on their religious beliefs (or lack thereof) is a violation of their First Amendment rights, and therefore classically un-American. Having a leader who was unapologetically atheist would, in my opinion, be a huge step forward to bettering the general public's attitude toward their fellow citizens whose only difference from them is a different belief system-- a belief that does not (or at least should not) affect anyone other than themselves.
This was... a lot longer than I expected it to be, and I am deeply, deeply sorry if any of this is offensive to anyone, I truly don't mean it to be. But that's my reasoning in a nutshell! Also, I'm definitely sure Ron Paul would have different views were he not a Christian, as many of his views are based in his belief in God. That's actually a really interesting thing to think about, would he have more or fewer followers if he were an atheist? I definitely think that he would have a radically different group of people championing him, and for all I know it may actually be larger than his following now, as non-religious people in the US take up over 16% of the population (taking the place as the second-largest religious group in the country) and are vastly under-represented, and would therefore probably flock to someone who shared their views. On the flip-side, I'm sure there would also be a large portion of the American people who would consider him crazy, amoral and/or unfit to lead, but again, it would a vastly different group from any who may currently hold any of those feelings.
I'm going to stop typing before this becomes unreadable, haha. Sorry for the length.
