Our Godless Constitution
- Thread starter shanek
- Start date
-
- Tags
- constitution godless
CFLarsen said:
I'm saying that our system as our founders envisioned it, which is what we're talking about, isn't set up to make it any more difficult for atheists.
You could point to the dearth of atheist Presidents, but I could also point you to the dearth of atheist candidates for President. In fact, the only one I know of in recent memory was Harry Browne, but his problems getting elected had to do with his third party status.
What about astronauts? I can name one astronaut who ran for President for a major party and didn't even make it past the nominations. And as I recall, he tried it twice. Does that mean that astronauts have problems getting elected in America?
Brown
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Messages
- 12,984
Just a follow-up:SezMe said:
I have not yet been able to find all of the filed briefs at a single web site. But I have found--and read--about half a dozen of them at different web sites. When I track down the briefs of the major players, I will probably start a new thread with links.
Two of the most interesting briefs come from Roy Moore (the "Ten Commandments Judge" from Alabama) and the Jewish Anti-Defamation League (I hope I've got that name right).
Moore's brief, of course, seeks the same result as that of the United States Solicitor General. But Moore's rationale is strikingly different from, even inconsistent with, the rationale proposed by the United States.
The Jewish organization's brief is, in a word, fascinating. It points out that most people who want to display the Ten Commandments invariably want to display a watered-down Protestant version, and not the Jewish version. In fact, the Ten Commandments displays omit the words that the Jews consider to be of the greatest importance.
Even more interesting is the discussion of representations of the decalogue 250 to 600 years ago. The decalogue was not revered by the Christian establishment. On the contrary, the two tablets were used to symbolize Judaism much in the way Hitler used the yellow star to symbolize Judaism: as a mark of disgrace. In addition, the tablets were often depicted in art upside down, to indicate that the Jews followed the wrong religion.
It does if you can find me a poll saying that less than half of all Americans would answer yes to the question: "If your party nominated a generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be an astrounaut would you vote for that person?â€shanek said:
http://www.skeptic.com/brightBrouhaha.html
I was thinking that perhaps a better parallel would be the example of bachelor presidential candidates; bachelorhood has generally been regarded as a notorious liability for serious presidential hopefuls. Still, I expect more than one-half of American voters would answer your poll question "Yes" if it concerned bachelors rather than atheists, even if in reality it would unfavorably influence their vote.Kerberos said:
Claus: By the way, you used to have archived over at skepticreport.com at least part of the old pruned thread entitled "The Ten Commandments and Legal Tradition". Now the old link doesn't work. Has the document disappeared or is it still hanging around somewhere?
True, the real influence might be even bigger than what the poll sugests since most likely more people are intolerant than are willing to admit it, but even ignoring this the poll shows that an atheist wouldn't have a chance in hell. Of course it's perfectly possssible that there's prejudice against bachelors too, it wouldn't matter in Denmark, either bacholorhood or atheism. We probably have had both atheist and bachelor prime ministers, but faith and whether you're married is considered such a non-issue that I'm simply not aware of it.ceo_esq said:
I agree. What would have to happen in order for an atheist to win the big one? Hmm... Obviously, at a minimum, the opposition would have to field an unelectable candidate. Problem is, that's usually a Democratic specialty - which would require the Republicans to play the role of nominating the atheist - which won't happen. The whole scenario falls apart at that point.Kerberos said:
Thanz
Fuzzy Thinker
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2002
- Messages
- 3,895
Or, perhaps when the candidate's opponent makes it an issue. You can be sure that if Harry Browne had any chance at all of making an impact on the election, his atheism would have been used against him by the big two candidates (or at least by the repbulicans).shanek said:
Another thought - I would think that after 9/11 a muslim in America may have even more trouble getting elected than an atheist.
shanek said:
You are taking one example and then extrapolate to show that it isn't an issue?
I've found the Gallup polls and they show a very clear pattern:
The conclusion is devastatingly clear: As long as you have a religious faith of some sort, people will vote for you. If you don't, you can't win.
Heck, you can even be black, gay or a woman, you will still get far, far more people voting for you, than if you are an atheist.
Don't claim that religion isn't an issue in politics, because it clearly is.
You are wrong.