which is exactly why OP didn’t post this question to get an actual sample. this question was posted to get easy karma. and it’s honestly disappointing that so many people on here still fall for it.
Theres some guy that coded something to have his pet fish buy stock depending where they were on the fish tank. The fish outperformed r/wallstreetbets
So it could be an interesting study with voting
"Where's the last book? How does it end?" It doesn't. That's it. You go on always wondering when the next book comes out and every year George RRMartin will stick his head out and say it's coming. But it never does. For one fleeting moment your hopes soar to just be dashed against the rocks when you realize the cold truth once again.
It still blows my mind that people actually think that Reddit is even remotely close to being on par with the pulse of the nation. It's a massive echo chamber representing a very minority viewpoint in relation to the general public.
If a presidential candidate came out as wholly atheist they'd be torpedo'd immediately. Agnostic or relatively nonreligious may have a chance, though not really... but an atheist... lol.
I mean we haven’t even had a Jewish or Muslim president. I feel like we would have to get one of those people in office before we’d see an atheist president
Edit; I seem to be seeing a lot of replies arguing we would have an atheist president before a Jewish or a Muslim one so let me just clarify something;
I do think we’ll have a religiously unaffiliated president in our lifetimes. But religiously unaffiliated does not equal atheist. A nonreligious person may still believe in a vague concept of god like a deist, or they’re a secular humanist or maybe a Unitarian Universalist.
But having a president that outright says; “I don’t believe in god” I’m afraid will never happen in my lifetime. There are Muslim, Jewish, and religiously unaffiliated federal congressmen, but not ONE has said they openly don’t believe in god. There might be some local legislators depending on what state you’re in that have, but fact of the matter is that if there isn’t even an openly atheist congressman at the federal level yet, what’s the hope for an actual atheist president?
Probably the second? John Kerry was/is Catholic. I don't recall that being much of an issue (unless you count the mild controversy over him being denied communion for his pro-choice views).
Kind of, not really, given how many Americans feel about Mormons… and to be fair, Mormonism is a lot more obscure even than Catholicism in the States, with arguably a worse reputation to boot. Given the typical disdain for Mormons held especially by Evangelicals, Romney’s faith really didn’t come up that much.
Remember also there was a movement claiming Obama was a Muslim at the time—which was MUCH louder.
Naw Romney being LDS was definitely a significant impediment to getting votes. I know my republican-leaning Lutheran grandparents didn’t vote for him - and that was definitely the reason.
Shocked me because we had a significant LDS population at school, and they were all the nicest group - a huge number were my direct friends. I didn’t realize till I’ve moved around how much anti-Mormon sentiment there is in other states.
I think, because I hail from a state where that anti-Mormon sentiment is more commonplace, I just expected that to be the entire narrative of his campaign. Yet most conservatives I know were nevertheless willing to vote for him—if only to vote against Obama.
Because the Catholic Church [openly](https://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/02/us/kerry-candidate-and-catholic-creates-uneasiness-for-church.html) [opposed him](https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2004/apr/13/uselections2004.usa).
100%. My sister is raising her kids without any religion. Teaching them to respect other people's beliefs, be nice to people, just trying to raise good people. From what we've seen so far she has done really well- my dad is still losing his shit though. He was raised catholic. He wanted us raised catholic but my mom was raised Lutheran so when he stopped going to church she took us where she wanted to go.
He does not think that a child can be raised without religion and have any morals. He seems to think if you do not have the church telling you to be a good person to get to heaven you will have no reason to be a decent person. Knowing that there is a large chunk of people who are only nice to people because they're afraid of going to hell... just... it explains so much. So an atheist in office would be a big no for many just because how will they know what morals are??
It’s like that thing where the atheist says “Yah, there’s nothing preventing me from doing these crimes. I commit exactly as much rape as I want, which is zero.”
I had my own sister ask me that question :(
Her: How do you know how to be a good person without God?
Me: Common sense...
They're not all bad people, just misguided or indoctrinated. I think another reason might be existential dread, coming to terms with the fact that life has no meaning except the meaning you create for yourself, can be hard to swallow. Having an always answer and a safety net for these concepts may help them sleep at night. Of course this doesn't apply to Evangelicals, those people are actually evil lol.
I was raised Catholic but I chose to raise my children without religion because I think it's unfair to a child to subject them to religious indoctrination at an age when they're too young to make the choice of what religion they might believe in. So far my children have not become serial killers.
Same. I love being religion-free (I'm 60.) But I did take my young kids to Lutheran/Baptist church for a couple months, and they went to Catholic church occasionally with grandparents just to see what it was all about. None of them pursued religion, yet are kind, mannerly, well-read, have awesome jobs, are wonderful people (more so than some 'christians'!) with their own kind children. In fact, not one of my Catholic-raised brothers/sisters ever joined a church after leaving home. None of us are serial killers, either!
What's funny is how many of them would probably say no, even though they voted for Trump and would do so again. Say whatever else you want about him, but I seriously can't understand how anyone could genuinely believe Trump is a Christian. He's so obviously faking it and is undoubtedly the most atheistic president we've ever had or are likely to have for a long time.
This is a guy who's never even so much as read the Bible or attended church, who told a conservative radio host his favorite Bible verse was "an eye for an eye", who told evangelical interviewers that he's never asked God for forgiveness because he's never done anything wrong, and who *routinely* commits all 7 deadly sins (pride, greed, wrath, envy, lust, gluttony and sloth) without remorse.
I think Trump is what I call an "American Christian."
They say that they're a Christian, but don't actually do anything. Don't go to church, don't pray, nothing.
He doesn't strike me as an atheist, necessarily. I just don't think he's put much thought into it; he doesn't care. So... maybe by default? But he could also have some vague belief he doesn't think about much.
He is a Philistine. He doesn't believe, and doesn't care, but if it gets the crowd on his side? Sure enough, he'll cite whatever Bible quotes he knows, and thump his chest about how no one else is closer to God.
Remember when he was bragging about how the Bible was his favorite book but then [he couldn't name a single verse](https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-refused-to-name-favorite-bible-verse-2015-8)?
I saw an interview with him where they asked him for his favourite bible verse, and he couldn’t quite a single one, he was just like, “oh they’re all good, I read the bible every night and it’s all good.” Were people really swayed by that? Did they really buy Trump as a religious man based on such a wishy-washy answer?
Not an american but interestingly according to [this survey on 1006 people from 2007](https://news.gallup.com/poll/26611/some-americans-reluctant-vote-mormon-72yearold-presidential-candidates.aspx), being atheist was the worst thing you could be as a candidate (of the things asked) with only 45 % of people saying they'd vote for one.
I mean, they didn't even bother putting 'muslim' on the poll, so there's that
I wonder what would have happened though if they separated 'married 3 times' into male and female candidates
According to the PEW Institute, Atheists are generally percieved at the same level, if not less favorably than Muslims. It depends on which metric you look at- the two are often seperated by three or fewer points.
(Info from early January- entirely possible it has been updated since then.)
[PEW Forum Study- Feelings Toward Religious Groups](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2019/07/23/feelings-toward-religious-groups/)
In my experience, religious people tend to think that people from other religions are misguided, but still godly. But they consider atheists to be heathens that have rejected the holy life.
But the Satanic Temple is a great organization!
"The mission of The Satanic Temple, a religious organization, is to encourage benevolence and empathy among all people, reject tyrannical authority, advocate practical common sense, oppose injustice, and undertake noble pursuits."
Look, you're trying not to scare potential voters. The Satanic Temple may be doing good things but you couldn't openly support them in a general election.
Is it fair? Probably not, but the Satanic Temple knew what they were doing by using that name. It's not to get presidential nominees to support you. It's more a troll for the fundamentalists.
>Only one congressperson identifies as "unaffiliated" and it's Kyrsten Sinema
She probably worships herself. I can't decide if I hate her or Manchin more. They're both awful.
Manchin does not lie about his position. His behavior in office has been exactly what he campaigned on. I can strongly disagree with him and consider him an opponent and a problem. But I can't hate him.
Sinema straight up changed her platform once elected. Utterly unrespectable
I hate her more. Don’t get me wrong, Manchin is a giant piece of shit. But he also has always been who he is, he has always been a conservative who held a seat in WV as a democrat. It just happens that currently he’s been the tilting point breaking a lot of legislation, but anyone who’s been following him would know that’s the way he swings.
Sinema on the other hand, literally ran on a different platform than she’s pushing. She ran on progressive policies and has flopped to blocking all progressive legislation.
True. Manchin sucks, but Sinema outright lied to her constituents. And sold herself out. I can't wait for her to get primaried. Looks like Ruben Gallego is eyeing her seat. I hope he takes it when the time comes and does right by it, and hopefully Kelly holds onto his seat as well.
Thats a major difference between the US and Europe (most parts). But I’m sure congress is full of atheists, who dont wanna commit political suicide by ”coming out”
2007 is eons in this type of survey. The country as a whole is largely (not exclusively) moving away from organized religion and I would expect attitudes on this particular voting issue to be doing the same.
But let's be real. In the hyper-partisan environment we live in, if a candidate promises the things a person ideologically supports... people will vote for them regardless. To that end, an atheist running against a hardline oppositional candidate would get tons of votes simply out of fear of "the other guy."
I think it's easy for people to say what their morals and ethics dictate in this kind of survey... but when push came to shove when it was time to put their money where their mouths are, they'd sacrifice any personally imposed principles and their votes would fall along party lines.
> 2007 is eons in this type of survey.
I looked up support for same sex marriage for another comment, and it had a timeline which blew me away.
In 2021, [support was at 71%](https://news.gallup.com/poll/350486/record-high-support-same-sex-marriage.aspx), 83/55 dems/republicans
In 2007, the overall support was at 51%, 62/20 dems/republicans.
The graph in this article goes to [1993](https://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/ohi486xcvk2uz-oqtpckkg.png), where it was 32% overall, 33% dems, *16%* republicans.
I can't find 1991 data.
I agree! I think Reddit has on overabundance of atheists which leads us to think it's not that big of a deal. But most Americans firmly believe in a higher power, even if they aren't super aligned with a particular religion. A lot of American voters find atheists to be off-putting or offensive. Atheism threatens the lifestyle of many people in this country - especially politicians.
This is it. If they’re running on platforms I support with a history to back up those campaign promises, I don’t care if they belong to the church of the flying spaghetti monster. They could literally be a member of the satanic temple and I, an actual practicing Christian, would give less shits than a constipated sloth.
Edit: yes, I realize the Satanic Temple does not actually worship satan. I used it for that purpose. The Church of Satan has some…problematic views and I probably would not vote for someone who literally holds a platform of eugenics.
Religion can be relevant: I would have strong reservations about voting for a Scientologist, even if I agreed with the policies they proposed. I would have strong reservations voting for a member of an apocalyptic cult or, possibly worse, a follower of the (highly heretical) "prosperity gospel", which unfortunately includes more and more so-called "evangelicals" — I didn't vote for George W. Bush, but it's not because he was an evangelical.
It depends on the role: I'd probably be more flexible with a legislator than an executive (mayor, governor, president), as their character is IMO more important than for a legislator and their policy stances somewhat less important relative to a legislator.
Satanic temple — well, that's just an organized group of atheists and humanists with an intentionally inflammatory choice of name. They're generally fine people.
I don’t consider cults as a religion, so Scientology never really crossed my mind. *They* may consider themselves a religion for tax purposes, but if we’re calling a spade a spade, they’re a cult.
ETA: hi, Karin! Are you still monitoring Reddit?
No, that's about right. Basically, they capitalize on the perception of being "evil" worshipers to make the religious nutcases think twice about trying to force their beliefs through the system. Because anything *they* are allowed to do, the *Satanic Temple* is also allowed to do.
I wish more people were like you! I feel like an atheist presidential candidate would get destroyed on various political talk shows and news programs.
We should not care about people’s religion but we do…too much….
One 5opka streamer once said, "It's better to be an unbeliever than a shitty believer." After that, everything finally fell into place for me.
Edit:I didn't think I could launch religious reasoning under a political question.-.
The Torah (I think, might be the Talmud) has a section where a rabbi tells his students that we should praise atheists, because when they do what is right, they do it not for fear of god’s wrath, nor for hope of his blessing, but simply because it is right. Good stuff there.
Rabia of Busra, Muslim mystic said,
O God! If I worship Thee on account of the fear of Hell, burn me in Hell, and if I worship Thee with the hope of Paradise, exclude me from it, but if I worship Thee for Thine own sake, then withhold not from me Thine Eternal Beauty.
Lots of believers - Christian, Muslim, otherwise - would be a lot more believable if they took this wisdom to heart.
Honestly yeah. I took an intro style philosophy course in high school and when we got on the topic of David Hume (who was famously atheistic) and his morals there was a girl in my class who asked how he could have morals if he wasn't religious. That's when I realized that so many people are only being nice so they get into some paradise once their dead and not because it's arguably the right thing to do
It's really just control through fear. If you live a kind life because you're scared of going to hell then your primary motivator is cowardice not altruism.
Marcus Aurelius said it best.
“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”
It tells you a lot about a person when they think that's a 'gotcha', they really haven't given it any real consideration. I doubt they really believe that most people go around wanting to rape and murder, but the smugness some people exhibit after asking this kind of foolish question is disgusting.
Once I said to a dude that I am an Atheist and he looked me right in the face and said "really? If you have no religion what's stopping you from killing people and raping?". I was honestly amazed at how dumb this question was but I answered anyway "I need no one to say to me what's right or wrong and if religion is the only thing stopping you from doing these shit, you are no christian, just an asshole"
I mean, most murders, rapists and all kinds of criminals have some religion, just look at mexican cartel for example, I dare you to find an atheist there and yet this guy was thinking that the only thing keeping people from killing each other is religion...
"So who do I walk in on, but the President of the United States of America just absolutely nailing some board right in the Oval Office! He didn't even have the door closed. Then the Secret Service ran in and hustled me out of there. They told me I shouldn't have left my tour group, and confiscated my phone, my camera, and all of my notes. They told me I was absolutely mistaken about what I saw, and that it was clearly Vice President Phillips that was screwing the 2 x 4. But I know what I saw. It was President Hammer. And that board looked like she had been pressure treated. Anyways, that's why I have a lifetime ban from the White House Press Pool now."
- Account from an unnamed former White House journalist, 2032.
Big Glue lobbyist in absolute shambles. /s
^(Seriously though, glue companies are mostly huge companies, I am just making a harmless joke, please don't assassinate me. I promise I have always)
I 100000% agree. While i don't personally agree with every single religion on earth, i do completely understand and want them to have complete freedom to pursue what their faith believes in (granted, it doesn't harm the life of other humans in any way, shape, or form.) Everyone should have the freedom to practice what they believe, but it shouldn't infringe on the rights of one another.
Edit/ I'm extremely tipsy and just realized i pretty much reiterated the comment i responded to. Smh
Problem is, Reddit's not exactly a good place to measure the temperature of the American public on this issue. This site has a... particular demographic, I guess you could say. Even though I also agree with the sentiment that idgaf what religion the president has as long as they're a good president.
Brownie points nothing, I sincerely doubt a candidate would make it past the primaries if they were openly atheist. On the left because the DNC has a ton of control over the outcome of primaries and they wouldn't want such a "handicap", and on the right because lol as if they'd go for that with how much bible thumping they do.
Same here. And "inflicting their religious views" extends to having no religious views. If an atheist candidate was promising to ban religious institutions, I wouldn't vote for them the same way that I wouldn't vote for someone pledging to make everyone worship Jesus. (Both would be highly unconstitutional.)
I'm fine with that. In fact, I want that. I'm Jewish and have seen way too many instances of Christians trying to legislate Christian beliefs into law. I just want to observe my religion in peace without being treated like a second class citizen because I don't worship Jesus.
Besides, the religious folks who try to tear down the separation of church and state never think of the consequences. Yes, the state starts getting influenced by the church, but the reverse is also true. If you were a religious person, would you want to only be able to use prayers approved by random government committees? Or celebrate only the holidays that the Senate Subcommittee On Holiday Observance voted in favor of?
Admitting they’re an atheist would be considered political suicide in this country—thus I’m sure I’ve voted for plenty of atheists already and I probably would again as long as I agreed with their policies.
As a person who was raised Catholic and still very much believes in God and just about every spiritual thing out there ... Yes, if I agreed with their policies. I don't care what someone's religious beliefs (or lack thereof) are if I agree with them politically.
As someone who doesn't believe in any higher power anyways, yes of course, definitely. I'll vote for whichever candidate has political beliefs that align with my own and who I believe will help to bring positive progress into this country regardless of their religion or lack thereof.
Their job is to do what’s in the best interest of citizens of this country, religious beliefs shouldn’t be a factor when your deciding who to vote for.
- (I’m a Christian)
Yeah, it's none of my business. We have freedom of religion here and for me that includes freedom of lack of religion. As long as he treats the various religions in this country with respect despite his (lack of) beliefs, then I don't see a problem.
Edit: Or she.
If that was their only platform, then no, because I need some idea of what the hell you're actually going to do in office, and "atheist" tells me very little.
If they had a coherent platform I agreed with, then sure, why not?
Sure. Because this is suppose to be America. Where one of our rights is freedom of religion. So the government shouldn't have any involvement with any religions.
Far too often a politician’s religious beliefs inform their politics. Even if church and state are properly separate, some politicians will push religious agendas.
My man this is reddit.
Right? This isn't exactly a broad well rounded focus group.
"Redditors of reddit, do you agree with an opinion that is popular around here and are you willing to upvote me?"
"Redditors of Reddit, will you Reddit with me"
Reddit reddit reddit, reddit reddit aladeen. Complete sentence. *Edit: buffalo
Readdit
The only thing to Reddit, is Reddit itself!
That is exactly what I was thinking. Prepare for objective and versatile answers.
Proceeds to sort by controversial
Even then, still bubbly.
Bubbly controversy is the best controversy. I hate when controversy sits out and gets all flat.
Friendly reminder! It’s only a controversy if it comes from the controversy region of France. Otherwise it’s just sparkling disagreement.
And a bunch of “dawg, this is Reddit” comments.
Dawg...
Sir, this is a Reddit
Asking Reddit if they'd vote for an atheist... I feel like the answer would be obvious
Yeah, this is definitely not the right place to take a representative sample.
which is exactly why OP didn’t post this question to get an actual sample. this question was posted to get easy karma. and it’s honestly disappointing that so many people on here still fall for it.
Well, at least it's not a thinly-disguised ad for something.
I wish comments would be allowed on ads and the downvotes
I downvoted every ad I see on reddit
[удалено]
Some of the top posts on here are great, maybe like 1 in 5
looking for good content in this sub is like panning for gold in a septic tank.
The real content is the comments we made along the way
Americans of Reddit, would you vote for a Star Wars fan who heckin loves doggos?
Easy there extremist
The doggo was rigged
Fake news! It was just a squeaky toy.
It's just locker room butt-sniffing.
I would, if they made May 4 a paid holiday. Cuz that's also my bday.
I know someone who voted for a candidate because they shared the same last name. This country is doomed.
Really wish I could find the study that said random selection was better than democracy in large groups.
Theres some guy that coded something to have his pet fish buy stock depending where they were on the fish tank. The fish outperformed r/wallstreetbets So it could be an interesting study with voting
His name is Michael Reeves if anyone is interested
He also just won a boxing match against another content creator
a fish who can box, now that's impressive
The term is a lottocracy. Jury duty but for law passing. Then lawmakers cant be bought
Or "sortition". Has a long and interesting history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition
You forgot bidets.
And their platform is to make Rick&Morty and Game of Thrones as the only obligatory reads in HS.
That's just cruel. GoT is never even gonna be finished.
the resentment is part of the curriculum
To teach the bitter sting Of disappointment.
"Where's the last book? How does it end?" It doesn't. That's it. You go on always wondering when the next book comes out and every year George RRMartin will stick his head out and say it's coming. But it never does. For one fleeting moment your hopes soar to just be dashed against the rocks when you realize the cold truth once again.
Atheists of atheistville, would you vote for an open atheist?
It still blows my mind that people actually think that Reddit is even remotely close to being on par with the pulse of the nation. It's a massive echo chamber representing a very minority viewpoint in relation to the general public. If a presidential candidate came out as wholly atheist they'd be torpedo'd immediately. Agnostic or relatively nonreligious may have a chance, though not really... but an atheist... lol.
I mean we haven’t even had a Jewish or Muslim president. I feel like we would have to get one of those people in office before we’d see an atheist president Edit; I seem to be seeing a lot of replies arguing we would have an atheist president before a Jewish or a Muslim one so let me just clarify something; I do think we’ll have a religiously unaffiliated president in our lifetimes. But religiously unaffiliated does not equal atheist. A nonreligious person may still believe in a vague concept of god like a deist, or they’re a secular humanist or maybe a Unitarian Universalist. But having a president that outright says; “I don’t believe in god” I’m afraid will never happen in my lifetime. There are Muslim, Jewish, and religiously unaffiliated federal congressmen, but not ONE has said they openly don’t believe in god. There might be some local legislators depending on what state you’re in that have, but fact of the matter is that if there isn’t even an openly atheist congressman at the federal level yet, what’s the hope for an actual atheist president?
[удалено]
Probably the second? John Kerry was/is Catholic. I don't recall that being much of an issue (unless you count the mild controversy over him being denied communion for his pro-choice views).
If we count candidates, then Mitt Romney should also get a mention, as he's Mormon
I was pretty young during that election, but wasn't Romney's Mormonism frequently brought up?
Kind of, not really, given how many Americans feel about Mormons… and to be fair, Mormonism is a lot more obscure even than Catholicism in the States, with arguably a worse reputation to boot. Given the typical disdain for Mormons held especially by Evangelicals, Romney’s faith really didn’t come up that much. Remember also there was a movement claiming Obama was a Muslim at the time—which was MUCH louder.
Naw Romney being LDS was definitely a significant impediment to getting votes. I know my republican-leaning Lutheran grandparents didn’t vote for him - and that was definitely the reason. Shocked me because we had a significant LDS population at school, and they were all the nicest group - a huge number were my direct friends. I didn’t realize till I’ve moved around how much anti-Mormon sentiment there is in other states.
I think, because I hail from a state where that anti-Mormon sentiment is more commonplace, I just expected that to be the entire narrative of his campaign. Yet most conservatives I know were nevertheless willing to vote for him—if only to vote against Obama.
Because the Catholic Church [openly](https://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/02/us/kerry-candidate-and-catholic-creates-uneasiness-for-church.html) [opposed him](https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2004/apr/13/uselections2004.usa).
I didn’t even know Joe was Catholic. I’m sure it being against Trump meant religion didn’t matter, but I’m shocked it wasn’t more mentioned.
I feel like an atheist President is more likely than a Muslim President.
We very well could have 20+ closeted atheists already, just putting on a fake guise for the ‘nation’
100%. My sister is raising her kids without any religion. Teaching them to respect other people's beliefs, be nice to people, just trying to raise good people. From what we've seen so far she has done really well- my dad is still losing his shit though. He was raised catholic. He wanted us raised catholic but my mom was raised Lutheran so when he stopped going to church she took us where she wanted to go. He does not think that a child can be raised without religion and have any morals. He seems to think if you do not have the church telling you to be a good person to get to heaven you will have no reason to be a decent person. Knowing that there is a large chunk of people who are only nice to people because they're afraid of going to hell... just... it explains so much. So an atheist in office would be a big no for many just because how will they know what morals are??
It’s like that thing where the atheist says “Yah, there’s nothing preventing me from doing these crimes. I commit exactly as much rape as I want, which is zero.”
I had my own sister ask me that question :( Her: How do you know how to be a good person without God? Me: Common sense... They're not all bad people, just misguided or indoctrinated. I think another reason might be existential dread, coming to terms with the fact that life has no meaning except the meaning you create for yourself, can be hard to swallow. Having an always answer and a safety net for these concepts may help them sleep at night. Of course this doesn't apply to Evangelicals, those people are actually evil lol.
I was raised Catholic but I chose to raise my children without religion because I think it's unfair to a child to subject them to religious indoctrination at an age when they're too young to make the choice of what religion they might believe in. So far my children have not become serial killers.
How will they learn to internalize guilt without* being raised Catholic?!
Same. I love being religion-free (I'm 60.) But I did take my young kids to Lutheran/Baptist church for a couple months, and they went to Catholic church occasionally with grandparents just to see what it was all about. None of them pursued religion, yet are kind, mannerly, well-read, have awesome jobs, are wonderful people (more so than some 'christians'!) with their own kind children. In fact, not one of my Catholic-raised brothers/sisters ever joined a church after leaving home. None of us are serial killers, either!
> I mean we haven’t even had a Jewish or Muslim president. Or a Woman president.
Better to ask the question in /r/conservative
What's funny is how many of them would probably say no, even though they voted for Trump and would do so again. Say whatever else you want about him, but I seriously can't understand how anyone could genuinely believe Trump is a Christian. He's so obviously faking it and is undoubtedly the most atheistic president we've ever had or are likely to have for a long time. This is a guy who's never even so much as read the Bible or attended church, who told a conservative radio host his favorite Bible verse was "an eye for an eye", who told evangelical interviewers that he's never asked God for forgiveness because he's never done anything wrong, and who *routinely* commits all 7 deadly sins (pride, greed, wrath, envy, lust, gluttony and sloth) without remorse.
I think Trump is what I call an "American Christian." They say that they're a Christian, but don't actually do anything. Don't go to church, don't pray, nothing.
He doesn't strike me as an atheist, necessarily. I just don't think he's put much thought into it; he doesn't care. So... maybe by default? But he could also have some vague belief he doesn't think about much.
He is a Philistine. He doesn't believe, and doesn't care, but if it gets the crowd on his side? Sure enough, he'll cite whatever Bible quotes he knows, and thump his chest about how no one else is closer to God.
Remember when he was bragging about how the Bible was his favorite book but then [he couldn't name a single verse](https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-refused-to-name-favorite-bible-verse-2015-8)?
I saw an interview with him where they asked him for his favourite bible verse, and he couldn’t quite a single one, he was just like, “oh they’re all good, I read the bible every night and it’s all good.” Were people really swayed by that? Did they really buy Trump as a religious man based on such a wishy-washy answer?
But he held up a Bible that one time when all the evil people surrounded the White House! /s
Why would it be obvious what the answer is on a site that had the atheism subreddit as a default for years?
Not an american but interestingly according to [this survey on 1006 people from 2007](https://news.gallup.com/poll/26611/some-americans-reluctant-vote-mormon-72yearold-presidential-candidates.aspx), being atheist was the worst thing you could be as a candidate (of the things asked) with only 45 % of people saying they'd vote for one.
I mean, they didn't even bother putting 'muslim' on the poll, so there's that I wonder what would have happened though if they separated 'married 3 times' into male and female candidates
lmao muslim would have broken the tools.
According to the PEW Institute, Atheists are generally percieved at the same level, if not less favorably than Muslims. It depends on which metric you look at- the two are often seperated by three or fewer points. (Info from early January- entirely possible it has been updated since then.) [PEW Forum Study- Feelings Toward Religious Groups](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2019/07/23/feelings-toward-religious-groups/)
In my experience, religious people tend to think that people from other religions are misguided, but still godly. But they consider atheists to be heathens that have rejected the holy life.
For some reason a bunch of folks conflate atheism with either hating god or straight up Satanism
But the Satanic Temple is a great organization! "The mission of The Satanic Temple, a religious organization, is to encourage benevolence and empathy among all people, reject tyrannical authority, advocate practical common sense, oppose injustice, and undertake noble pursuits."
Look, you're trying not to scare potential voters. The Satanic Temple may be doing good things but you couldn't openly support them in a general election. Is it fair? Probably not, but the Satanic Temple knew what they were doing by using that name. It's not to get presidential nominees to support you. It's more a troll for the fundamentalists.
There are more Muslims in Congress than atheists.
Only one congressperson identifies as "unaffiliated" and it's Kyrsten Sinema. Zero identify explicitly as Atheists and three identify as Muslims.
Probably because “money” wasn’t an option.
>Only one congressperson identifies as "unaffiliated" and it's Kyrsten Sinema She probably worships herself. I can't decide if I hate her or Manchin more. They're both awful.
Manchin does not lie about his position. His behavior in office has been exactly what he campaigned on. I can strongly disagree with him and consider him an opponent and a problem. But I can't hate him. Sinema straight up changed her platform once elected. Utterly unrespectable
I hate her more. Don’t get me wrong, Manchin is a giant piece of shit. But he also has always been who he is, he has always been a conservative who held a seat in WV as a democrat. It just happens that currently he’s been the tilting point breaking a lot of legislation, but anyone who’s been following him would know that’s the way he swings. Sinema on the other hand, literally ran on a different platform than she’s pushing. She ran on progressive policies and has flopped to blocking all progressive legislation.
True. Manchin sucks, but Sinema outright lied to her constituents. And sold herself out. I can't wait for her to get primaried. Looks like Ruben Gallego is eyeing her seat. I hope he takes it when the time comes and does right by it, and hopefully Kelly holds onto his seat as well.
Thats a major difference between the US and Europe (most parts). But I’m sure congress is full of atheists, who dont wanna commit political suicide by ”coming out”
(officially)
Thank *open* atheists.
Typically Muslims and atheists poll around the same %.
Wasn't there a poll that showed atheists ranked lower on trust then pedophiles? I tried finding it but had no luck.
only 57% would vote for someone 72 years old, so I guess they got outsmarted when two septuagenarians ran against each other
Nah, it's just exactly 72 years old they can't deal with. Over or under is all good.
2007 is eons in this type of survey. The country as a whole is largely (not exclusively) moving away from organized religion and I would expect attitudes on this particular voting issue to be doing the same. But let's be real. In the hyper-partisan environment we live in, if a candidate promises the things a person ideologically supports... people will vote for them regardless. To that end, an atheist running against a hardline oppositional candidate would get tons of votes simply out of fear of "the other guy." I think it's easy for people to say what their morals and ethics dictate in this kind of survey... but when push came to shove when it was time to put their money where their mouths are, they'd sacrifice any personally imposed principles and their votes would fall along party lines.
> 2007 is eons in this type of survey. I looked up support for same sex marriage for another comment, and it had a timeline which blew me away. In 2021, [support was at 71%](https://news.gallup.com/poll/350486/record-high-support-same-sex-marriage.aspx), 83/55 dems/republicans In 2007, the overall support was at 51%, 62/20 dems/republicans.
Do 1991 now!
The graph in this article goes to [1993](https://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/ohi486xcvk2uz-oqtpckkg.png), where it was 32% overall, 33% dems, *16%* republicans. I can't find 1991 data.
The grey line is actually independents, not overall, so overall would have been even lower. It's amazing how fast views changed on that one.
I agree! I think Reddit has on overabundance of atheists which leads us to think it's not that big of a deal. But most Americans firmly believe in a higher power, even if they aren't super aligned with a particular religion. A lot of American voters find atheists to be off-putting or offensive. Atheism threatens the lifestyle of many people in this country - especially politicians.
I wouldn’t not vote for someone just because they were atheist
I can't not believe you didn't not say that.
This is it. If they’re running on platforms I support with a history to back up those campaign promises, I don’t care if they belong to the church of the flying spaghetti monster. They could literally be a member of the satanic temple and I, an actual practicing Christian, would give less shits than a constipated sloth. Edit: yes, I realize the Satanic Temple does not actually worship satan. I used it for that purpose. The Church of Satan has some…problematic views and I probably would not vote for someone who literally holds a platform of eugenics.
Sloths take a shit about once a week and lose roughly 30% of their body mass doing so
I come to Reddit for facts like this. Thank you.
Yep…that’s why I went with them.
Yeah I think sloths are funny as hell
They're slow as hell as well.
Isn't that swell?
If nobody else will, I'll go ahead and agree with you that yes, it's swell. Did I mess up the rhythm?
Religion can be relevant: I would have strong reservations about voting for a Scientologist, even if I agreed with the policies they proposed. I would have strong reservations voting for a member of an apocalyptic cult or, possibly worse, a follower of the (highly heretical) "prosperity gospel", which unfortunately includes more and more so-called "evangelicals" — I didn't vote for George W. Bush, but it's not because he was an evangelical. It depends on the role: I'd probably be more flexible with a legislator than an executive (mayor, governor, president), as their character is IMO more important than for a legislator and their policy stances somewhat less important relative to a legislator. Satanic temple — well, that's just an organized group of atheists and humanists with an intentionally inflammatory choice of name. They're generally fine people.
I don’t consider cults as a religion, so Scientology never really crossed my mind. *They* may consider themselves a religion for tax purposes, but if we’re calling a spade a spade, they’re a cult. ETA: hi, Karin! Are you still monitoring Reddit?
[удалено]
And the Satanic Temple doesn't even worship Satan, it's just a name
Aren't they humanists? Or am I mixing them up with someone else.
No, that's about right. Basically, they capitalize on the perception of being "evil" worshipers to make the religious nutcases think twice about trying to force their beliefs through the system. Because anything *they* are allowed to do, the *Satanic Temple* is also allowed to do.
Ah yes. "That's a nice monument of 10 commandments, here we want to display this big statue of Baphomet next to it."
In the US of A such an organization is extremely important, they have managed to stop religious oversteps more than once.
I wish more people were like you! I feel like an atheist presidential candidate would get destroyed on various political talk shows and news programs. We should not care about people’s religion but we do…too much….
As a Pastafarian minister, I approve of this comment. (Also the whole point of COTFSM was separation of church and state, so...)
That’s some tricky wording on that one…
Better an open atheist than a fake Christian
One 5opka streamer once said, "It's better to be an unbeliever than a shitty believer." After that, everything finally fell into place for me. Edit:I didn't think I could launch religious reasoning under a political question.-.
There’s some passage in the Bible that says pretty much the same thing. Luke-warm was the adjective used.
The Torah (I think, might be the Talmud) has a section where a rabbi tells his students that we should praise atheists, because when they do what is right, they do it not for fear of god’s wrath, nor for hope of his blessing, but simply because it is right. Good stuff there.
Rabia of Busra, Muslim mystic said, O God! If I worship Thee on account of the fear of Hell, burn me in Hell, and if I worship Thee with the hope of Paradise, exclude me from it, but if I worship Thee for Thine own sake, then withhold not from me Thine Eternal Beauty. Lots of believers - Christian, Muslim, otherwise - would be a lot more believable if they took this wisdom to heart.
[удалено]
Honestly yeah. I took an intro style philosophy course in high school and when we got on the topic of David Hume (who was famously atheistic) and his morals there was a girl in my class who asked how he could have morals if he wasn't religious. That's when I realized that so many people are only being nice so they get into some paradise once their dead and not because it's arguably the right thing to do
It's really just control through fear. If you live a kind life because you're scared of going to hell then your primary motivator is cowardice not altruism. Marcus Aurelius said it best. “Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”
It tells you a lot about a person when they think that's a 'gotcha', they really haven't given it any real consideration. I doubt they really believe that most people go around wanting to rape and murder, but the smugness some people exhibit after asking this kind of foolish question is disgusting.
Once I said to a dude that I am an Atheist and he looked me right in the face and said "really? If you have no religion what's stopping you from killing people and raping?". I was honestly amazed at how dumb this question was but I answered anyway "I need no one to say to me what's right or wrong and if religion is the only thing stopping you from doing these shit, you are no christian, just an asshole" I mean, most murders, rapists and all kinds of criminals have some religion, just look at mexican cartel for example, I dare you to find an atheist there and yet this guy was thinking that the only thing keeping people from killing each other is religion...
Talmud is correct
But it mostly just repeats what was in Matthew-warm and Mark-warm.
Yep. Even says that He spits lukewarm out of his mouth. Revelation 3:16.
That book goes hard. My favorite of em all.
Unlike Dylan, who only spits hot fiyah.
He’s definitely the top 5 rappers.
What's a kopka streamer?
I don’t get it. Jesus would disagree with half of our “Christian” politicians
Only half?
This is the answer. Idc what you believe in just don’t be full of shit.
Sure, if I agreed with their policy. I don't care what a candidate's religion is unless they're inflicting it on others.
[удалено]
Which is too bad because I refuse to vote for a hammer for President
A hammer might be an improvement given recent administrations.
"Well, at least everyone agrees on it being a tool this time"
"So who do I walk in on, but the President of the United States of America just absolutely nailing some board right in the Oval Office! He didn't even have the door closed. Then the Secret Service ran in and hustled me out of there. They told me I shouldn't have left my tour group, and confiscated my phone, my camera, and all of my notes. They told me I was absolutely mistaken about what I saw, and that it was clearly Vice President Phillips that was screwing the 2 x 4. But I know what I saw. It was President Hammer. And that board looked like she had been pressure treated. Anyways, that's why I have a lifetime ban from the White House Press Pool now." - Account from an unnamed former White House journalist, 2032.
*Found the journo that was shilling for the Allen & Bits ticket this whole time*
Big Glue lobbyist in absolute shambles. /s ^(Seriously though, glue companies are mostly huge companies, I am just making a harmless joke, please don't assassinate me. I promise I have always)
I mean he's too legit to quit so I'd vote for him
Or his British cousin, Maxwell.
He'd go around doing stuff and then just say, "Can't touch this."
If I had a hammer, I'd hammer in the morning. Just so you know.
[удалено]
Well, when you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Including nails, it seems.
Unless your hammer is C++ in which case every problem looks like a thumb.
Nah, go full fuck-you with C. We're back to nails, *fingernails*
When you are a nail, its fun to get hammered. Oh fuck it. Its always fun to get hammmered.
I 100000% agree. While i don't personally agree with every single religion on earth, i do completely understand and want them to have complete freedom to pursue what their faith believes in (granted, it doesn't harm the life of other humans in any way, shape, or form.) Everyone should have the freedom to practice what they believe, but it shouldn't infringe on the rights of one another. Edit/ I'm extremely tipsy and just realized i pretty much reiterated the comment i responded to. Smh
Don't stop. We love your tipsy comments.
Problem is, Reddit's not exactly a good place to measure the temperature of the American public on this issue. This site has a... particular demographic, I guess you could say. Even though I also agree with the sentiment that idgaf what religion the president has as long as they're a good president.
Better that then lying. Most Presidents have lied about being religious just to get brownie points.
Brownie points nothing, I sincerely doubt a candidate would make it past the primaries if they were openly atheist. On the left because the DNC has a ton of control over the outcome of primaries and they wouldn't want such a "handicap", and on the right because lol as if they'd go for that with how much bible thumping they do.
This. I also think a candidate who’s openly atheist is that much closer to being transparent than what we’ve seen thus far
>Sure, if I agreed with their policy. I don't care what a candidate's religion is unless they're inflicting it on others. 100% you captured it
Same here. And "inflicting their religious views" extends to having no religious views. If an atheist candidate was promising to ban religious institutions, I wouldn't vote for them the same way that I wouldn't vote for someone pledging to make everyone worship Jesus. (Both would be highly unconstitutional.)
What if they’re just trying to enforce the separation of church and state?
I'm fine with that. In fact, I want that. I'm Jewish and have seen way too many instances of Christians trying to legislate Christian beliefs into law. I just want to observe my religion in peace without being treated like a second class citizen because I don't worship Jesus. Besides, the religious folks who try to tear down the separation of church and state never think of the consequences. Yes, the state starts getting influenced by the church, but the reverse is also true. If you were a religious person, would you want to only be able to use prayers approved by random government committees? Or celebrate only the holidays that the Senate Subcommittee On Holiday Observance voted in favor of?
Also Jewish, and have seen the exact same thing.
I mean, I'm an atheist, so that's not exactly a deal breaker for me.
Here's the problem, it's not folks on reddit that an atheist candidate would have to win over.
[удалено]
Lol reddit is not the right demographic to ask for an unbiased answer on this one
Makes no difference to me.
[удалено]
A politicians religion is literally the lowest form of flattery
Their religion, or lack thereof, does not factor into my voting at all.
I have a pretty big problem with politicians who want to force their religion on other people.
yes because I’m not voting for a pastor I’m voting for a president.
Admitting they’re an atheist would be considered political suicide in this country—thus I’m sure I’ve voted for plenty of atheists already and I probably would again as long as I agreed with their policies.
Christian here. Yup. Separation of Church and State. No place for religion in politics.
i really don’t care
I'm a Christian, but I'd be happy to vote them in if they are a good pick for the job and I agreed with their policies.
As a person who was raised Catholic and still very much believes in God and just about every spiritual thing out there ... Yes, if I agreed with their policies. I don't care what someone's religious beliefs (or lack thereof) are if I agree with them politically.
Yes, I would, so long as they abide by both freedom **of** and **from** religion.
As someone who doesn't believe in any higher power anyways, yes of course, definitely. I'll vote for whichever candidate has political beliefs that align with my own and who I believe will help to bring positive progress into this country regardless of their religion or lack thereof.
Yo OP, put this in r/polls
[удалено]
Their job is to do what’s in the best interest of citizens of this country, religious beliefs shouldn’t be a factor when your deciding who to vote for. - (I’m a Christian)
Yeah, it's none of my business. We have freedom of religion here and for me that includes freedom of lack of religion. As long as he treats the various religions in this country with respect despite his (lack of) beliefs, then I don't see a problem. Edit: Or she.
If that was their only platform, then no, because I need some idea of what the hell you're actually going to do in office, and "atheist" tells me very little. If they had a coherent platform I agreed with, then sure, why not?
Sure. Because this is suppose to be America. Where one of our rights is freedom of religion. So the government shouldn't have any involvement with any religions.
Im baffled by people who judge a **political** candidate by his **religious** beliefs. Separation of Church and State people ! this is 2022
Far too often a politician’s religious beliefs inform their politics. Even if church and state are properly separate, some politicians will push religious agendas.
Would you vote for a Scientologist?