NonChristian Presidency???

[Caedmon]

In light of the current pledge "controversy", esp. President Bush's immediate commentary, do you think it would be possible for an atheist to successfully run for and attain the office of President of the United States of America? Could it ever happen? Let's expand that to other religions. Could America, for example, "tolerate" a muslim, hindu, buddhist, etc. President? Does America expect to always see a Christian in office that will, for example, "condemn" things like the pledge being called unconstitutional because of the phrase "under God"? What are your thoughts?

 

[Mallory Knox]

Well what is it like 52% of America is Christian when I looked it up before? Is it still that?

 

[tyler4588]

Even though I wouldn't, I'm sure most of America wouldn't care...I mean, they just made the Pledge Of Allegiance unconstitutional in some states, because it says "under God".

 

[Mallory Knox]

Originally posted by tyler4588
Even though I wouldn't, I'm sure most of America wouldn't care...I mean, they just made the Pledge Of Allegiance unconstitutional in some states, because it says "under God".

Well that wasn't a vote. That was just because the court realized it's unconstitutional.

 

[GraftMeIn]

There's nothing in our laws that state someone running for president has to be a christian, Our president is voted on by the majority, therefor there will always be a possibilty of an athiest running for president and being voted in. Not sure how likely it would be that it would happen though.

 

[Mallory Knox]

Originally posted by GraftMeIn
There's nothing in our laws that state someone running for president has to be a christian, Our president is voted on by the majority, therefor there will always be a possibilty of an athiest running for president and being voted in. Not sure how likely it would be that it would happen though.

Well of course it's possible, I think the question is do we think it will happen.

I think a non-CHRISTIAN person could possibly make it...but an ATHEIST, no, that's right up there with females and homosexuals.

 

[Susan]

Perhaps, but NOT with my support.
Besides we HAVE had non-Christian presidents before. maybe not OPENLY non-Christian, but I can tell you that not all our presidents have necessarily been Christians.

 

[Davester]

Like others have stated, I doubt and openly athiest candidate could possibly win a presidential election.

Susan wrote:

Perhaps, but NOT with my support.

Why not?

 

[Patmosman_sga]

We had Bill Clinton for eight years. While he regularly waved his Bible in the air while coming out of church on Sunday, he was certainly the most non-Christian (or, perhaps better stated, anti-Christian) president I can remember. Even his public displays of his "faith" wreaked with hypocrisy.

 

[Caedmon]

Originally posted by Patmosman_sga
We had Bill Clinton for eight years. While he regularly waved his Bible in the air while coming out of church on Sunday, he was certainly the most non-Christian (or, perhaps better stated, anti-Christian) president I can remember. Even his public displays of his "faith" wreaked with hypocrisy.

I'm curious. Could you give some specific examples?

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Originally posted by Patmosman_sga
We had Bill Clinton for eight years. While he regularly waved his Bible in the air while coming out of church on Sunday, he was certainly the most non-Christian (or, perhaps better stated, anti-Christian) president I can remember. Even his public displays of his "faith" wreaked with hypocrisy.

 

Be careful about judging another's relationship with God.  Jesus was quite clear about this, and Paul discussed this at length.

 

[Starscream]

Be careful about judging another's relationship with God.  Jesus was quite clear about this, and Paul discussed this at length.

That's a good point for Christians to consider.  Besides, in the sin is sin sense, is extra-marital oral sex and worse then drunk driving or calling someone a 'major league a-hole' into a microphone (that you think is turned off)?

Also, IIRC, while Governer of Texas, Bush Jr. was once asked what he and his father talk about while fishing.  I can't repeat his response here, but it was a slang reference to the female genitalia.

And none of here now what really goes on in the personal lives of our presidents.  I doubt Clinton was the first (nor will he be the last) to do what he did, he just got caught (and the conservatives had a field day with it - but some of them got burned, didn't they?).

We can play the Who's a True Christian™ game with anyone.

 

 

 

[Satoshi]

Originally posted by Patmosman_sga
We had Bill Clinton for eight years. While he regularly waved his Bible in the air while coming out of church on Sunday, he was certainly the most non-Christian (or, perhaps better stated, anti-Christian) president I can remember. Even his public displays of his "faith" wreaked with hypocrisy.

Another No True Scotsman.  Is this #105,203,889,340 or #105,203,889,341?

 

[TheBear]

This is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. If religious people or Christians are elected to office, it is the people that put them there. The overwhelming majority of American citizens, (especially the ones that vote), are theists. The atheists can squirm and holler all they want, they are in the extreme minority. If that changes, and an overwhelming majority of Americans become athiests, then and only then would it be feasable for an atheist to become President.


John

 

[Satoshi]

Originally posted by TheBear
This is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. If religious people or Christians are elected to office, it is the people that put them there.
John

Well, except the last election.

 

[Mallory Knox]

Originally posted by TheBear
This is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. If religious people or Christians are elected to office, it is the people that put them there. The overwhelming majority of American citizens, (especially the ones that vote), are theists. The atheists can squirm and holler all they want, they are in the extreme minority. If that changes, and an overwhelming majority of Americans become athiests, then and only then would it be feasable for an atheist to become President. 

Well of course, that's incredibly obvious. Who's complaining? What atheists are "squirming and hollering"?

 

[Starscream]

What atheists are "squirming and hollering"?

I was wondering that myself.  Most of us voted for a Christian in the last election.

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

"Be careful about judging another's relationship with God. Jesus was quite clear about this, and Paul discussed this at length."

But the bible also tells us we can judge by the fruits ones bear. Also remember when not too nice of things were said about the church that allowed and even boasted about open sin by a couple in the NT? Clinton sure didn't bear good fruits. He was a liar, and adulterer just to name a few obvious ones. I'm not going to judge his salvation but as Christians we do need to keep in mind we are allowed to do certain judging. I'm really sick of people who say it's none of your buisness what he does behind closed doors. Would you put up with it if your boss was doing things like that with your coworker while on the job? Remember you pay a price when you decided to do a certain jobs. With the president that means he has higher standards then most workers. I really hope Clinton does have a relationship with God and asked for forgivness of his sins but only Clinton and God knows if that's the case.

 

[TheBear]

Originally posted by Satoshi


Well, except the last election.

People like you never cease to amaze me. There have been almost 100 independent recounts of the votes, from all sides of the issue, with every imaginable scenario played out, and ALL point to Bush as the legitimate winner of the election.



John

 

[Morat]

  You must not read the same papers I do. Admittedly, under the headline "Bush Won", reading all the way down to the bottom, you find out that out of the 4 possible ways to count the vote, Gore won 2 (including the one most likely, legally) and Bush 2.

   You really should make it a habit to read articles backwards. Most papers won't lie, but they'll slant things. The real information, such as it is, is buried below the fold, back in the "continued on page 23" and in general at the back of the article. 


Here


  And, lest we forget, that victory did sort of require that almost 60,000 people be purged from the voting rolls, for having names that were "sorta similiar" to convicted felons.

  Regardless, of course, of whether these ex-felons had the right to vote (most did. Few states permanently strip the right to vote). And of course, the number of false positives was staggering.


  Bush is, of course, President. But to pretend he is as legitimate as any other President is ignoring reality.