Will there be an Atheist, Female, or Homosexual President in our lifetime?

[Bradeck]

Never underestimate the stupidity of the uninformed individual. Who here honestly (Americans) believes that if Sarah Palin entered the race right now, she would be catapulted to front runner status in the Republican primary? Not saying she'd win the general election, but she'd sure as hell walk away with the Republican nomination.

Now I said Americans not to discourage debate, but to get a sense of how many Americans believe my thesis, that Sarah Palin would win the nom if entered now. So the women thing is no issue. Carry a big enough bible and be willing to say any outlandish shit it takes, and you'll get the Republican bucks. Granted the race right now is super weak, what with an out of touch mormon billionaire, a 3 time wife swapping douchebag, and a Christian Alter boy that wants to impose Christian Sharia law in the US.

My personal thoughts?

Woman president: next 3-4 elections.
Atheist president: Never as long as we have a two party system, one of which wants the country to follow the laws of Jesus.

Gay President: See above.

 

[infohippie]

We may already have a female president within the next 20 years based on how things are going lately, but still a large majority of people would not support an Atheist or homosexual president simply because... well, they all have reasons.

They all have reasons? No, they don't. They all have prejudices. There should be absolutely no reason at all not to elect a gay president, a female president or an atheist president apart from their presented policies. Sadly, hardly anyone votes after thinking logically about a candidate's policies or voting record, they nearly all vote according to their emotional response to the candidates. I think it will be a very long time before there is an atheist president or a gay president, since these prejudices are particularly strongly ingrained in a large section of the US populace. I think you will have a female president sooner than either of the other two choices simply because there is less prejudice towards women these days. Not to say there is none, just that there is less.

 

[JaiDin]

Who gives a rat's a**!!!! Concentrate on the individual canadate's credentials/ability. Stop putting/identifying people into little groups. Look for the best person for the job. It's a small minded person who can only see a person's skin color/gender/race etc...

 

[Grathius22]

Why does it matter?

A president shouldn't be voted because of religion, race, or gender. I honestly don't care who's president, as long as people shut the fuck up about it. I just don't care what they are, now are they doing a good job?

/rant.

Anyway, I'd say in the next fifty years we'll get one if not all of those. Most likely because they are what they are, not because of how good or smart. Which pisses me off.

 

[CODE-D]

Who says we havent already had an atheist or homo one and he just didnt tell or acted the part.
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

 

[Urgh76]

All good answers have been made so far, but there remains one huge question about all this.

Will there ever be a Female Athiest Homosexual President?

 

[thenuminator]

I wonder how long it will take for an Latino, atheist, female, homosexual to be elected president. a few hundred years?

 

[emeraldrafael]

we got kinda close with Hillary, so I dont htink it will be too long till we see one if the right woman runs.

for an atheist, I dont know, but it would be interesting to see how they approaches the religious aspects of being president (being sworn in and stuff like that) as well as how they would approach religion in general (as long as tey dont dick around in it I dont care).

Homosexual... well, I ont think we'll see one of the flaming homosexuals, but a reserved one I could see, especially if they dont make a huge deal about it. But htere would be a ton of pressure in there for them.

 

[theultimateend]

Female in the next 10 years
Atheist not for a long time
Gay... next 50 years

Odd considering Athiesm has been seeing a near constant growth in the US.

That's why there is such a harsh backlash against it amongst fundamentalist voters, its become obvious that they need to get oppressive if they want to stay relevant.

Wish them the best of luck, but I imagine people enjoy the luxuries of technology more than the potential promise of luxuries once their life is abruptly ended.

Then again so is homosexuality...

I don't know which way women are going.

Personally I'm all for people being themselves, so I'm more for voting people based on their character than some (unalterable) characteristic. So with the exception of Athiesm I don't believe the other examples should be taken into consideration while voting.

I would more positively consider an Athiest, more because (perhaps erroneously) I wager that it takes a lot of thought to accept that there is no fairy tale ending. I would hope that such a decision would transfer into a desire to improve the living world rather than to constantly long for a new one somewhere else.

 

[Chicago Ted]

Who really cares?

I'm sorry, but voting on race, religion, colour, or creed, is just stupid to me. What matters is the politics. Some people don't see that, but I really don't think that highly of people let those factors influence their views in any way, especially in the political realm. Just because a person does or does not fit into a certain classification does not make an impact on who has the best policies and leadership to run a country.

 

[blaze2142]

We have already had an athiest president so I think that is the most likely to happen. For the others I think that as long as they know what they're doing they should have a chance.

 

[DoomyMcDoom]

when it comes down to it, whichever they think is more likely to get elected, for the most part, all of em are the same, I know it seems like a douchey thing to say, but the whole two party system, it's all just a big construct to make people passionate enough or focused enough on the fact that they're "choosing the next leader of the country" to realize that it's all just gonna be more of the same after the electoral buzz wears off... I know it's been said before, and people might think I'm some kinda conspiracy nut or some bullshit for saying it, but honestly, it really doesn't matter much who gets elected as president, it's all just a big control scheme, means you think you see who runs America, you think you know who you should be angry at, but really whoever is "in charge" is just a puppet... It's all a show, get some popcorn and watch, take part in it if you want to, just don't get your hopes up for too much real change, I mean things change gradually, but honestly I don't see a homosexual president happening simply for the reason that you have a HUGE fundamental christian population to deal with and they don't take kindly to people of that persuasion. so until that changes, or they all die or something... you're not likely to see it.

Female president might happen soonish, but I mean unless the fact that she's a woman sells her votes, like it did for Obama being black, and having the whole CHANGE thing going on, but hey, look at your country, it's still in the shit, in fact worse off than before, yeah lotta change that made, it's not Obama really running things, so what did it affect? Not a damn thing.

And athiest, well as I said, large population of fundamental christian whackjobs, not likely to be seen by either party as a selling feature.
Best bet is a female president, won't be any different, but might be nicer to look at, if she's not too old.

 

[theultimateend]

Who really cares?

I'm sorry, but voting on race, religion, colour, or creed, is just stupid to me. What matters is the politics. Some people don't see that, but I really don't think that highly of people let those factors influence their views in any way, especially in the political realm. Just because a person does or does not fit into a certain classification does not make an impact on who has the best policies and leadership to run a country.

I agree with everywhere but creed.

It would be important to not elect someone who believes that women are the source of all evil and must be controlled.

What people believe is extremely important in whether or not you should trust them writing laws or representing you.

 

[Jodah]

Everything is possible I suppose. That being said a female president is the only one I can realistically see happening in my life time.

An open atheist would be portrayed as the anti-christ and people would question how someone who doesn't believe in God can be moral. Nevermind that some people can actually think for themselves and control themselves. Some people need God to tell them what is right and wrong. Some people don't. The majority of society cannot yet accept that.

A homosexual president would turn everyone gay and ruin the moral fiber of America corrupting the youth beyond question and leading to World War 3, 4, and 5.

 

[Kurenaino]

Psst...

We've already had a gay president! James Buchannan! Now, perhaps the better question is when we'll have an OPENLY gay president. But just gay? Check. Go, gay president, go! Even if he was a TERRIBLE president...

 

[Orange12345]

This is why I hate politics, none of these things has ANYTHING to do with being a leader or president

 

[Ordinaryundone]

Female: Definitely. Probably pretty soon.

Atheist: Probably, but not as soon as a female. Religion is still a touchy issue for a lot of people. It may be one of the situations where the president isn't OVERTLY atheist, but makes no decisions or policy based on religion and doesn't bring it up.

Homosexual: Not a chance, unless he is heavily closeted. Heck, I'd be surprised if we ever saw a SINGLE (non-married) President, regardless of sexual orientation.

 

[Vanilla_Druid]

Time for some straight facts: Atheists are the most-hated and least-trusted group in the United States, and are far, far less likely to be elected President. Period. All of these are different studies, with particular emphasis on the final two studies, where atheists are, by a large margin, less likely to be elected president than gays, Muslims, Jews, women, every other category, period.

http://blog.lib.umn.edu/edgell/home/Strib%20Atheist%20Faith%20and%20Values.html

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2011/11/09/would-you-be-comfortable-with-an-atheist-president-2011-survey-says/

http://digitaljournal.com/article/315425

http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistbigotryprejudice/a/AtheistSurveys.htm

http://www.gallup.com/poll/26611/some-americans-reluctant-vote-mormon-72yearold-presidential-candidates.aspx

Atheists are, as of now, by far the last group to be considered for the presidency. We've got some 3 or 4 openly gay congressman, and only, if I recall correctly, a single congressman that doesn't adhere to a religion, and even then is from the stereotypically "godless" San Fransisco.

It just seems like there is this "Don't ask, Don't tell" when it comes to atheism in the US. Americans like to say: "you can be an atheist if you want, but keep your views to yourself." That sentiment does not seem bad until one realises that Christians can talk about JesusGod all they want without people batting an eye, but when an atheist talks about the non-existence of a deity, the atheist is labeled a snobbish bully. Of course, Christian Americans will not understand the subtle discrimination atheists face until the experience it themselves.

 

[Saltarius]

Given that few states even allow gay marriage, I'd have to say we're far off from a homosexual president. A female president is very well possible within the next few years. I really can't say when or ever we could have an atheist president.