Does a candidate's atheism/religiousness matter to you?

[Gringo]

Poll question: Does a candidate's atheism/religiousness matter to you?

Does a candidate's atheism/religiousness matter to you?

[MissB]

1. I want to know where he/she stands

As an atheist, I like to know how religious the candidate is and how they live their life with regards to their beliefs. Just being a deeply religious person is not reason enough for me to not vote for someone. I'd just prefer that their beliefs be sincere and that they not be a fundamentalist nut.

[lastliberalintexas]

16. I don't even care

if s/he IS a fundamentalist nut- so long as they don't try to impose their beliefs on me. Be a member of the Lettuce Worshipers Church if you wish, just don't try to force me to join too! :-)

[wuushew]

2. Bush claims Gawd influences his policy decisions

therefore I disagree with Bush's religion.

I proprose reanimating Carl Sagan's corpse and running on the rational thought ticket.

[charlie]

9. Reanimating?

Not necessary. I'd prefer Sagan's blowfly-infested corpse to any assertion that deems ANY officeholder blessed by supernatural providence with infallibility.

[rock]

3. Yes. It's important to me that I know the candidate

has values other than those that arise from religion. (I am an aetheist.)

[ComerPerro]

4. You didn't have an option I liked

I really don't care if a person subscribes to this religion or that one, and I don't care if they don't have a religion at all.

HOWEVER: I am concerned with one thing: How fanatic they are about their beliefs. That is what concerns me most.

[Gringo]

6. In my opinion, a person who spouts their spiritual beliefs

as part of a political campaign, first of all cheapens those beliefs, and second of all is by default either a fanatic, or a phony - at least that's my take.

If they were sincere believers, they wouldn't use their religion to peddle themselves as candidates, unless they were fanatics.

[NNadir]

5. I am an atheist but don't require that a candidate share my view.

I do take it very unkindly however when a candidate trys to insert his or her religious views into their public policies. Bush, of course, is the most egregrious example. In the Democratic Party we have Lieberman and Kucinich as examples. Neither of the latter two are quite as offensive as the former, however.

I support Howard Dean, and I have no idea what his religion is, although I am aware that his wife is Jewish.

[knight_of_the_star]

7. I don't care what their faith is

So long as they don't use it to make policy, preach (ie Asscroft), or be influenced in decisions making by clergy of their faith. Bush I think does a little triple wammy there on my standards.

[salinen]

8. I would prefer

the candidate be an atheist. That way I know that the voice in his/her head is theirs.

[ringmastery]

10. What's an atheist to do?

Suppose you want to run for President or congress but you are an atheist, who would disclose that? It's unfortunately political suicide in this day and age. Has any elected offical come out as an atheist?

I guess the easy "out" is simply to say my religious beliefs and connection to god are personal and other evasive BS. blah blah blah

[politicat]

11. None of the above. No fundamentalism. That's my choice.

I'm an atheist-agnostic and I hate to say it, but I'd vote for a moderate, occasional Christian who doesn't have a close personal relationship with God over a rabid, one-note atheist.

I want a religious moderate who realizes that there are hundreds of belief systems in this country and NO ONE TRUE WAY. And that her/his system is not necessarily the best one for everyone.

However, I'll also vote for a rabid-religionist anything who is strong on the separation clause than a moderate who is wishy washy on it. That separation clause is critical and it's my #3 priority.

This would get me murdered in most atheist groups, and so I'm glad my real name isn't up here because I'm active and prominent in one of them, but atheism is a religion, as much as Mac/PC/Linux partisanship, sports teams, or any church group in the country. There are fundamentalist atheists who have made a "profession of faith" insisting that there is no god and the only way to be a real rationalist is to be sternly atheist. That's not acceptable in a president. Sorry. The reverse is true, too. I don't want anyone in the office who says the only way to be a real human or citizen or etc is to believe in a god. I want a leader who says "It's none of my business what you believe and none of the government's, and so we are hands off."

My ideal candidate is an ignostic - doesn't know, doesn't care, doesn't find it relevant to the job description. But that's not going to happen.

That's one of the reasons I like Dean. Not a big church goer. Has his own system. Those make me happy.

Politicat (who is an agnostic on the Presidential candidate idea, too....)

[ulysses]

12. other.

As long as they're not trying to force it on anyone else, I don't much care.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

13. Aren't "atheist" and "secular humanist"..

..basically the same thing?

[Gringo]

17. Not Really.

An atheist holds no religious beliefs.

A secular humanist may be privately very religious or spiritual, but doesn't believe that religious beliefs should be injected into public policy. He/she advocates policies that are SECULAR, and thus int the interest of all HUMANS, rather than just adherents to his own particcular religion.

This term has been sullied by the religious right, but I consider "secular humanist" to be a high complement.

[killbotfactory]

14. As long as they respect the seperation of church and state

I could care less...

[hlthe2b]

15. Relgious beliefs that are genuinely held and not a means to an

end are fine in my book, as is an absence of these same beliefs. I do look for some kind of moral compass, but I do not believe that has to be driven by religious belief. Whatever their beliefs, the person must still be able to think as a secularist to represent us all, IMO.

We certainly don't need another religious fanatic who doesn't question and whose dogmatic thinking makes them unwilling to listen to other viewpoints or to anoint themselves as infallible-- i.e., the Bush model, and I truly believe, the Lieberman model as well. The only difference between the two is that I do believe Lieberman's beliefs to be genuinely held, while with Bush, simply an excuse not to think for himself and a means to an end. No real difference than putting on his Texas "everyman" personna.


As far as I know, we haven't had a leader who was an admitted atheist, so I can really draw a flip side comparison. Nor have any atheists that I've known had a diminished sense of right and wrong guiding their decisions.

So, sincerity in their actions and expressed belief makes more of a difference to me than shared thoughts on religion.

[Killarney]

18. I would prefer that they not be too strong in their religion

It bothers me when I hear Bush say God chose him to be President or when one of his top generals says this is a holy war and we will win because our God is better than their God and the general isn't scolded... that scares me. I would rather than religion didn't come into government at all and that it wasn't mentioned. If a candidate uses God in all his speeches, to be honest, I probably would steer clear.

I'd love an atheist president, but that will never happen in my lifetime.

[Ediacara]

19. I don't care what religion they are, just so long as

they don't attempt to impose their religion on my public policy.

[Blue_Chill]

20. All things even I go with a non-literal Christian

However rarely will you find two canidates whos only difference are religious views. So I go with the one that most represents my views politcally and morally. Religion is really not much a concern to me as long as we agree on the issues.

[youngred]

21. I will second what everyone else says

as long as they're not forcing it down my throat they can believe whatever they want to believe

[BurtWorm]

22. I am inclined to reject a fundamentalist Christian for being

a fundamentalist Christian. The more orthodox a person is, the less I trust them to use reason alone in making decisions affecting everyone, even those not of his or her faith. So I'm prejudiced against ultrareligious people, yes. So sue me.

[Liberator_Rev]

23. I care about his/her values, but

I care about his/her values, but I don't care where he or she got them. However, if he or she is a Liberal like me, and he or she wants to get elected (i.e. chosen) by a constituency that is 70 to 95% "Christian", I hope he or she will be smart enough to claim that he or she is as deserving of support from "Christians" as any damn lying hypocritical Republican who claims to be "THE CHRISTIAN CANDIDATE".

See why Liberal Democrats have MORE reason to deserve the support of "Christians" than Republicans at http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/Democrats .