Does the president's religion or party alone matter completely? The real decision factor is who actually seems like they can get anything done with a useless house and senate.
Poll: Would you vote for a presdential republican candidate...
- Thread starter DudeistBelieve
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The minute he said "you believe in your fictional character I'll believe in mine" he will receive so much bad PR from every religious group that he will never get elected. That's not "I'm an atheist deal with it" that's on the level of "Religion is all a bunch of bollocks, you mad Christians?" Trolling religious people does not win elections. If he proves to not be someone dumb enough to troll large sections of the country while running for president I'd possibly vote for him though. On top of that... dude Superman was created by 2 Jewish dudes and has Judeo-Christian values. "What would superman do" is in a remote way a Christian moral compass.
To be honest, I don't trust this guy. He's obscenely rich, so he likely has even less sympathy for the working class than usual. Which is especially not good, because the working class is the majority if the country, so we need more rights for THEM, not more rights for their bosses. And if he's still for small government, then he's definitely not a politician I'd vote for. I support free health care, and big businesses cannot be trusted and need to be regulated heavily. So small government is not a good idea in my opinion.
Plus, "You believe in your fictional character, I'll believe in mine."? This guy sounds sort of like an arrogant ass. And as a role model, he'll only encourage atheists to behave the same way. (Too many of them already do.)
Beliefs don't matter in the slightest. Not one bit. What matters is tolerance, and policies that can actually help our country. I'm not entirely sure the 40+ people who voted the first option actually read what else this guy is about. Who cares what he believes religiously? It makes no difference whatsoever. What's important is how he would be as a politician, and what his policies are.
Plus, "You believe in your fictional character, I'll believe in mine."? This guy sounds sort of like an arrogant ass. And as a role model, he'll only encourage atheists to behave the same way. (Too many of them already do.)
Beliefs don't matter in the slightest. Not one bit. What matters is tolerance, and policies that can actually help our country. I'm not entirely sure the 40+ people who voted the first option actually read what else this guy is about. Who cares what he believes religiously? It makes no difference whatsoever. What's important is how he would be as a politician, and what his policies are.
I'd vote for the person who I felt matched my political views the closest, regardless of religion or party. So it I agreed with the Atheist then I'd vote for him, if not then I wouldn't. Simple as that for me.
FUCK YEA.LegendaryGamer0 said:I vote... for Sakura.
She is the best choice.
[sub]Damn, sleepy... need... rest...[/sub]
ALSO, topic creator, a candidate's religion or lack thereof shouldn't be a factor, really. It's not relevant to politics as much as you might think. Also, most Americans oppose "gay marriage," so you calling that "extreme" is flat-out wrong. Obama doesn't support that, even.
I second this!LegendaryGamer0 said:I vote... for Sakura.
She is the best choice.
[sub]Damn, sleepy... need... rest...[/sub]
Au contraire, I'd be willing to bet that most of us do support it. Or would support it if they weren't influenced by yet another tired old "think of the children" argument. I had a friend who once believed that allowing gay marriage would somehow corrupt children because they may have to be taught about it in schools as a result. Firstly, no they wouldn't. They don't teach us about straight marriage in school, so why would they teach us about gay marriage? Secondly, let's pretend for a second that they would teach gay marriage in schools. In this case, so what? The little brats can handle it. They're not THAT stupid.Gaming King said:FUCK YEA.LegendaryGamer0 said:I vote... for Sakura.
She is the best choice.
[sub]Damn, sleepy... need... rest...[/sub]
ALSO, topic creator, a candidate's religion or lack thereof shouldn't be a factor, really. It's not relevant to politics as much as you might think. Also, most Americans oppose "gay marriage," so you calling that "extreme" is flat-out wrong. Obama doesn't support that, even.
Anyway, I explained both of these points to my friend, and he switched his position. You see, I think that a lot of the people who are against gay marriage, aren't REALLY against gay marriage, but just afraid of how it will affect children. Because people are stupid about children. You wave a kid around and people will believe anything you have to say. As long as it's "FOR THA KEEDZ!" You don't even have to explain your argument. Literally just pick up a kid, wave him around like a flag, and say "Look, a kid!", and people will assume your position is valid, no matter what your position is.
In other words, being against gay rights totally IS an extremist point of view. The only reason it has such a high following is likely because somebody waved a kid around at some point and said "think of the children." At least, that's what I think happened.
That's still no real choice, I couldn't bring myself to vote for someone religious, or to vote for a conservative.
It would be horrible to vote in the US where voting for someone other than one of the two major parties really is throwing your vote away. When are you guys going to get proportional representation so it becomes a real option to vote for a third party, and it still actually counts for something?
It would be horrible to vote in the US where voting for someone other than one of the two major parties really is throwing your vote away. When are you guys going to get proportional representation so it becomes a real option to vote for a third party, and it still actually counts for something?
Being an atheist has exactly no bearing on whether that person is a competent leader, let alone a suitable president. Since I can also say that about the state of being a Republican, I'd go ahead and do the least amount of damage to this country by not voting. We're not going to fix anything with the tools we're legally allowed now.
L
You're completely wrong. First off, the more "normal" you make it, the more likely it is to affect children. Secondly, that's far from the only aspect that's fucked up about it. The union between a man and a woman is different than anything else, and the only pairing capable of producing offspring. It should therefore be defined differently, as it is not the same thing. Anyway, now taking a nap.Belated said:Au contraire, I'd be willing to bet that most of us do support it. Or would support it if they weren't influenced by yet another tired old "think of the children" argument. I had a friend who once believed that allowing gay marriage would somehow corrupt children because they may have to be taught about it in schools as a result. Firstly, no they wouldn't. They don't teach us about straight marriage in school, so why would they teach us about gay marriage? Secondly, let's pretend for a second that they would teach gay marriage in schools. In this case, so what? The little brats can handle it. They're not THAT stupid.Gaming King said:FUCK YEA.LegendaryGamer0 said:I vote... for Sakura.
She is the best choice.
[sub]Damn, sleepy... need... rest...[/sub]
ALSO, topic creator, a candidate's religion or lack thereof shouldn't be a factor, really. It's not relevant to politics as much as you might think. Also, most Americans oppose "gay marriage," so you calling that "extreme" is flat-out wrong. Obama doesn't support that, even.
Anyway, I explained both of these points to my friend, and he switched his position. You see, I think that a lot of the people who are against gay marriage, aren't REALLY against gay marriage, but just afraid of how it will affect children. Because people are stupid about children. You wave a kid around and people will believe anything you have to say. As long as it's "FOR THA KEEDZ!" You don't even have to explain your argument. Literally just pick up a kid, wave him around like a flag, and say "Look, a kid!", and people will assume your position is valid, no matter what your position is.
In other words, being against gay rights totally IS an extremist point of view. The only reason it has such a high following is likely because somebody waved a kid around at some point and said "think of the children." At least, that's what I think happened.
Your kidding right? There is more to a candidate then just their religion. I thought Kennedy beat that into the mainstream voter 50 years ago. If I agree with the person, I will vote for them, being Christian or Atheist doesn't make a difference.
