Why do we need religion in the White House?

[itsmeJonB]

Why does ones religious beliefs play such an important role in deciding who can be a candidate for office.
When are we going to have the first Atheist or non-Christian President?
Does religion really matter when we all want to reach a common goal?

 

[retro]

Probably because a good majority of people in this country, particularly in the south, are Christians and a lot of the Bible-thumping variety. But I also think that a lot of our Presidents have been Christians in name only... practicing the religion in order to court the religious vote.

 

[itsmeJonB]

Probably because a good majority of people in this country, particularly in the south, are Christians and a lot of the Bible-thumping variety. But I also think that a lot of our Presidents have been Christians in name only... practicing the religion in order to court the religious vote.

I agree with everything you just said.
I find it sad that they denounce their belief, or lack of belief, or however you want to call it, to please the crowd

 

[edgray]

It's very important because it means the presidents will make decent moral decisions such as invade foreign lands for oil, overthrow democratically elected leaders in foreign lands for access to their economies, keep on dragging out overseas wars with no end in sight, give much more scope for corporations to screw you over, increase unemployment, reduce welfare, increase poverty and make the rich richer. Oh, and spend your taxes like there's a sale on.

If they weren't religious, you couldn't guarantee such decent moral behaviour.

 

[porterjack]

It's very important because it means the presidents will make decent moral decisions such as invade foreign lands for oil, overthrow democratically elected leaders in foreign lands for access to their economies, keep on dragging out overseas wars with no end in sight, give much more scope for corporations to screw you over, increase unemployment, reduce welfare, increase poverty and make the rich richer. Oh, and spend your taxes like there's a sale on.

If they weren't religious, you couldn't guarantee such decent moral behaviour.

dripping, nay ooozing with sarcasm:clap

 

[Minor Axis]

It's very important because it means the presidents will make decent moral decisions such as invade foreign lands for oil, overthrow democratically elected leaders in foreign lands for access to their economies, keep on dragging out overseas wars with no end in sight, give much more scope for corporations to screw you over, increase unemployment, reduce welfare, increase poverty and make the rich richer. Oh, and spend your taxes like there's a sale on.

If they weren't religious, you couldn't guarantee such decent moral behaviour.

A good number of voters think you must follow their favorite religion to have a moral standard they approve of. This is why Mitt Romney might have a hard time being elected as President, regardless of his morals. But, I believe your actions speak more clearly than your label and you don't have to follow an officially condoned religion to have a good moral standard.

Good example of where claiming to be a Christian means nothing: George W Bush, the Christian who invaded a country without adequate provocation. And before anyone disagrees with me, please start out your reply with the adequate provocation that required an invasion. And I'm not talking about all the stuff we made up to justify it. Thanks.

 

[itsmeJonB]

Good example of where claiming to be a Christian means nothing: George W Bush, the Christian who invaded a country without adequate provocation. And before anyone disagrees with me, please start out your reply with the adequate provocation that required an invasion. And I'm not talking about all the stuff we made up to justify it. Thanks.

God told him to

 

[Minor Axis]

God told him to

Actually at some point, I think he said that publicly. Or at least indicated he had talked to God and gotten approval.

 

[porterjack]

to govern according to one creed seems somewhat authoritarian and regressive

the seperation of church and state therefore is vital

 

[itsmeJonB]

Actually at some point, I think he said that publicly. Or at least indicated he had talked to God and gotten approval.

Yep, thats what I was referring to

 

[Accountable]

Why does ones religious beliefs play such an important role in deciding who can be a candidate for office.
When are we going to have the first Atheist or non-Christian President?
Does religion really matter when we all want to reach a common goal?

People seem to have a pathological need to stereotype, categorize, or otherwise fit unique human beings into their preconceived little cubbyholes. That's why people get all bent out of shape about the D or the R, and anything not D or R must necessarily be fringe wackos too dangerous to be taken seriously, and so they ridicule, alienate, and marginalize.

 

[Tim]

People seem to have a pathological need to stereotype, categorize, or otherwise fit unique human beings into their preconceived little cubbyholes. That's why people get all bent out of shape about the D or the R, and anything not D or R must necessarily be fringe wackos too dangerous to be taken seriously, and so they ridicule, alienate, and marginalize.

I'll take that one step further, I think it's a concerted effort by the democrats and republicans to marginalize third party candidates. I don't think people would have a problem with a third party candidate if they weren't lead to believe they were fringe wacko's

 

[Zorak]

You don't, is the answer to the topic title.
In fact, I'd go as far as saying that without a secular state, certain items within the First Amendment are difficult to maintain.

 

[TheTinGirl]

You don't, is the answer to the topic title.
In fact, I'd go as far as saying that without a secular state, certain items within the First Amendment are difficult to maintain.

Completely agree.

 

[itsmeJonB]

You don't, is the answer to the topic title.
In fact, I'd go as far as saying that without a secular state, certain items within the First Amendment are difficult to maintain.

Title was more rhetorical, I would say the substance comes from the questions in the body paragraph

 

[Minor Axis]

I'll take that one step further, I think it's a concerted effort by the democrats and republicans to marginalize third party candidates. I don't think people would have a problem with a third party candidate if they weren't lead to believe they were fringe wacko's

I've mentioned this before, but that is why I like Instant Runoff voting (pick 2 or 3 candidates in your preferred order). It's been happening in Minnesota on the local level, but I the National Parties will never voluntarily agree. They like that sense of "am I wasting my vote?"