Voting christian
Posted: 16 November 2007 06:00 AM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1214
Joined  2007-09-21

I came across this page HERE from the Christian Science Monitor.  It is a voters profile on presidential hopefuls that plays particular focus on their religious beliefs.  How very inappropriate.  If there were a highly qualified religious candidate I would not hesitate in voting for them.  Is there not intolerance built in to the notion of religious influentials promoting candidates based on candidate religiosity?  And I thought that the Christian Science Monitor was one of the more credible christian journals.  rolleyes

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2007 07:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  946
Joined  2005-01-14

It is.  But you’ve got to remember that like it or not a large segment of the populace bases its decisions on religion, and there’s a prevalent misconception that all Democrats are “godless atheists” for some bizarre reason.  When I scanned over this link, I couldn’t help thinking it was a good thing that they were countering that misconception.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2007 07:44 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  946
Joined  2005-01-14

This might not be related, but the conservative newspaper where I live is currently making a big deal out of Hilary Clinton staging a couple of questions during an interview.  Didn’t I read that Bush staged whole interviews while he was running?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2007 05:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7547
Joined  2007-03-02

You know, I’d be more likely to vote for an atheist, esp if I thought they qualified, because I know they would keep Church and State separate, but at the same time, since I know most Episcopalians feel the same way, I’d for them if I thought they qualified.  So, it’s not so much for me based on religion, but whether or not I think they will follow the Constitution, play by the rules, and qualifies.  I think, even though Obama is a Christian, he would keep Church and State separate.  I also think he is qualified too.  I don’t think much of Hillary.  Although, she may have lost the election if enough Fundies heard her “offensive” language recently.  It went something like “How do we win against the bitch”.  I thought it was funny.  LOL  She’s still in third place for me.  Gravel, maybe.  I know he would definitely keep the Religious Reich out of office or at least try.  He’s my second choice.

Although, if my sons were younger and needed a sitter, which was asked else where, my choices some how change a little.  I’d choose Obama to watch my sons first.  He would understand them more than anyone and I know that he would not teach them any racist or bigotted B.S.  Hilary would be second, because she believes that it takes a village to raise a child and I know she would not hurt them, at least not physically, due to her “no spanking” laws she tried so hard to enact.  Gravel, well he just could not keep up with my sons (even when they were little).  I don’t think grandpa has the stamina to keep up with the young.  I don’t trust any of the others any further than I could throw, which isn’t at all.  The question was supposedly all about trust and well, even though I trust Gravel, I’m afraid he might not be able to keep up very well- when it comes to kids at least.  Now as president, that maybe another story.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 December 2007 08:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  11
Joined  2007-12-05
advocatus - 16 November 2007 07:38 AM

It is.  But you’ve got to remember that like it or not a large segment of the populace bases its decisions on religion, and there’s a prevalent misconception that all Democrats are “godless atheists” for some bizarre reason.  When I scanned over this link, I couldn’t help thinking it was a good thing that they were countering that misconception.

That misconception was created by this administration for the public from the beginning of the 2000 election, then hit hard upon for the 2004.

I am a Christian, Bush can’t take that away from me.

 Signature 

We have work to do, are you up for it?
http://www.unitedfor911truth.com

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 December 2007 09:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
lil - 06 December 2007 08:43 AM

I am a Christian

question

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 December 2007 11:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4072
Joined  2006-11-28

Yes, Lil, I find the notion that liberals in general have to be freethinkers or atheists strange. I grew up among left-wing, liberation theology Catholics, and it freaked me out the first time I met a Catholic who thought that religion could be seen as supportive of a conservative political agenda. Since the 1980s that’s been the norm, but that certainly hasn’t been true for most of American political history. It’s just a testament to how malleable the words of the Bible and the tenets of Christianity are in general that they can be seen by the faithful as fully consistent with any political perspective from socialist to libertarian to fascist. I can see why the Dems would want to reclaim the language of faith for their political agenda, and since I prefer their agenda I hope they succeed even though I ultimately think religion is totally unecessary as a justification for moral or political views.

 Signature 

The SkeptVet
The SkeptVet Blog
Militant Agnostic: I don’t know, and neither do you!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 December 2007 11:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  11
Joined  2007-12-05
mckenzievmd - 06 December 2007 11:07 AM

Yes, Lil, I find the notion that liberals in general have to be freethinkers or atheists strange. I grew up among left-wing, liberation theology Catholics, and it freaked me out the first time I met a Catholic who thought that religion could be seen as supportive of a conservative political agenda. Since the 1980s that’s been the norm, but that certainly hasn’t been true for most of American political history. It’s just a testament to how malleable the words of the Bible and the tenets of Christianity are in general that they can be seen by the faithful as fully consistent with any political perspective from socialist to libertarian to fascist. I can see why the Dems would want to reclaim the language of faith for their political agenda, and since I prefer their agenda I hope they succeed even though I ultimately think religion is totally unecessary as a justification for moral or political views.

That is an excellent perspective. I applaud you!

 Signature 

We have work to do, are you up for it?
http://www.unitedfor911truth.com

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 December 2007 12:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  135
Joined  2007-10-12

Since the 1980s that’s been the norm, but that certainly hasn’t been true for most of American political history.

Most Catholics I know are generally still liberal in their thinking, however many have fallen into the trap that “to vote Democrat is to vote Pro-Abortion” and they let an issue like that override all other issues making them vote like conservatives.

Interestingly, during the 1800’s it was generally the Evangelists who were the Liberals.  They wanted a separation of church & state because they feared some day they may get a Catholic president who would turn the country over to the pope.  Today’s Evangelists have become what they feared the Catholics were in the 19th Century (replacing the pope with televangelists LOL ).

In evolutionary terms their progression was:
[LEFT]Protestant Evangelist (W.A.S.P) => Ku Klux Klan => Religious Right [RIGHT]

 Signature 

“If there is no sufficient reason for war, the war party will make war on one pretext, then invent another… after the war is on.” - “Fighting Bob” La Follette

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 December 2007 12:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  134
Joined  2006-11-01

“Let us have…Philosophers, Deists, or even Atheists, rather than a Presbyterian President.”

—John Adams to Benjamin Rush, June 12, 1812

(Warning:  This quote may or may not be presented out of context)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 December 2007 12:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1214
Joined  2007-09-21

Freddy,

I must admit that you are warming up a bit to my heart.  LOL

Personally, I would not vote for a candidate based on their religious or non-religious views.  But I would certainly not vote for someone that I feared was to be oppressive toward anyone’s choice of religion or non-religion.

Profile