Unelectable Atheists: U.S. States That Prohibit Godless Americans From Holding Public Office

May 25, 2012 | Posted by: Hedonist | Full story: www.americanhumanist.org

With election season upon us, and a near constant stream of public jabs and rebuttals between incumbents and their challengers, we should focus on something besides the Americans that are running for office. Instead, let’s turn our attention to a rather peculiar set of state laws relating to elections and nonreligious Americans.

Comments (Page 4)

Showing posts 61 - 80 of80
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Jan 12

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62
May 28, 2012
 
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>One learns to be very cautious about UK newspaper reports - especially those in the Daily Mail.
Khatru wrote:
Believe it or not, I wasn't trying to turn this into some kind of UK vs US conversation. I was just making an observation that I was surprised, that's all.
I wouldn't quote the Daily Mail for a poll of this nature. That's like trusting Fox news for an unbiased report on atheism.
I don't know much about British news papers or their basis but that's what I assumed when I looked up what percentage of Britain supported gay marriage. Another poll I found showed it was like 45% for gay marriage and 45% against in UK. I forget where I found it. All I was trying to get at was that civil rights of people should not be left to vote by the majority, because it could lose in a place like the UK even in 2012.
Khatru wrote:
In any event, I suspect our idea of conservative is probably closer to your liberals. I tend to float somewhere between socialist and liberal.
The term "conservative" in America isn't what the original meaning of what the word used to mean. Just like the term "libertarian" today has a much different meaning than it is today. I consider myself a conservative and libertarian socialist. Look up American philosopher Noam Chomsky. He explains it best.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63
May 28, 2012
 
Wat the Tyler wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
I don't know much about British news papers or their basis but that's what I assumed when I looked up what percentage of Britain supported gay marriage. Another poll I found showed it was like 45% for gay marriage and 45% against in UK. I forget where I found it. All I was trying to get at was that civil rights of people should not be left to vote by the majority, because it could lose in a place like the UK even in 2012.
<quoted text>
The term "conservative" in America isn't what the original meaning of what the word used to mean. Just like the term "libertarian" today has a much different meaning than it is today. I consider myself a conservative and libertarian socialist. Look up American philosopher Noam Chomsky. He explains it best.
Your last point is so dead on. People in the US have this bad habit of changing the meanings of words to suite their own opinions too often.
EdSed

Wishaw, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#64
May 28, 2012
 
Wat the Tyler wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
... All I was trying to get at was that civil rights of people should not be left to vote by the majority, because it could lose in a place like the UK even in 2012.
Where else could it gain legitimacy?

The Telegraph (Con) says,
" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9129...
In the first test of opinion carried out since the launch of a high-profile campaign against the proposed change, 70 per cent of respondents agreed with the proposition that marriage should remain a “life-long exclusive commitment between a man and a woman”.
Only 22 per cent disagreed while nine per cent remained unsure, according to the ComRes survey carried out for the religious campaign group Catholic Voices. Unquote.

It is like the question, "do you believe in God". It depends how one asks the question and in what context.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

There is a campaign by the BMA to get the question and layout changed regarding 'religious opinion' in the UK as it keeps reinforcing the statistical evidence that the UK is mostly Christian. The wording assumes that people have a religion and people answer accordingly.(Even I was recorded as 'Christian' in the 2001 census and I haven't been such for decades).

http://www.libdemvoice.org/coalition-for-marr...

Wiki sites: "A 2004 poll by Gallup reported that 52% agreed that 'marriages between homosexuals' should be recognised while 45% said they should not. Support for same-sex marriage among British respondents was 1% higher than Canadians who were asked and 17% higher than Americans."
That is much more in keeping with what I find anecdotally and from personal experience on the net and in private life.

Most Brits (like me) initially respond that Gays have Civil Partnerships giving them full and equal rights including the right to adopt children, so why do they need to use the word 'married'? When confronted with people who ask "would you mind if blacks or Jews were denied equal status as regards State marriage?" and the fact that most Gays find being limited to Civil Partnership discriminatory, most Brits accept Gays should have 'married' and equal rights.

Note: State marriage is not religious marriage.

I think it is probably true to say that most people in the UK favor Gay marriage. I feel sure that most people in the UK couldn't care less about Gay marriage (or religion).
EdSed

Wishaw, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65
May 28, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Your last point is so dead on. People in the US have this bad habit of changing the meanings of words to suite their own opinions too often.
Interesting.
The political right in the US has somehow managed to change the dictionary definition of the word 'liberal'. Conservatives (cap 'C') and conservatives used to be proud to liberal. Now 'liberal' has been hijacked and equated to left-leaning political views. Observed from here (and if you pardon a foreign opinion) I think that has seriously damaged US politics.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#66
May 29, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Interesting.
The political right in the US has somehow managed to change the dictionary definition of the word 'liberal'. Conservatives (cap 'C') and conservatives used to be proud to liberal. Now 'liberal' has been hijacked and equated to left-leaning political views. Observed from here (and if you pardon a foreign opinion) I think that has seriously damaged US politics.
I do concur with your opinion. This altering of the terminology has been a huge detriment, both sides are attempting to demonize the other, and all they have done is muddied the water to the point that no one can see what's really going on. I am a fiscal conservative and social liberal, by their original definitions. We should focus more on issues at home, and everyone should have equality, but we should not spend extravagantly on useless things like we do, the parties and celebrations are barely a drop in the bucket on what we waste money on. There's a joke about the $500 hammer which is more accurate than many people will ever admit. Both of the major political parties here are really just the same, in spite of their campaign slogans and such, they are both still in it for themselves and don't care about the voters. That's why I go with Libertarian because it's at least different. Sadly, the Libertarian party here also attracts a lot of conspiracy nuts too, they're another embarrassment in the US political system but less dangerous than the religious zealots. I'm voting for Obama because if the one that the religious zealots vote for wins then the government may think that they are the majority and that will create a huge mess. As long as the government knows that the majority are shouting for equality more then they will not cater to the insanity that the religious zealots aspire to.

I was really hoping Ron Paul would get the Republican ticket, because he wouldn't cater to the religious zealots in spite of him believing in the crap they do, he doesn't actually believe we are a christian nation like they claim and I highly doubt we'd have much to worry about if he got into office. But it looks like another giant douche versus turd sandwich election.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67
May 29, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Your last point is so dead on. People in the US have this bad habit of changing the meanings of words to suite their own opinions too often.
It's not that so much as that people change their political attitudes as they move through life, both as individuals and as groups, but are much slower to change the labels that they apply to themselves or their party affiliations.

The result is a sort of "mission creep." As Republicans and conservatives move away from the political center, they create a vacuum that has to be filled, often by Democrats and liberals, some of whom would fit better into the Republican Party of of fifty years ago.

Reagan expressed that concept when he said that he had not left the Democratic Party, but that it had left him. During his lifetime, it was moving to the left while the Republicans absorbed some (but not all) of a center that is both coveted by the moderate members of each party and reviled by the extremists.

The world of politics is not going mad. It's always been that way.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68
May 29, 2012
 
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not that so much as that people change their political attitudes as they move through life, both as individuals and as groups, but are much slower to change the labels that they apply to themselves or their party affiliations.
The result is a sort of "mission creep." As Republicans and conservatives move away from the political center, they create a vacuum that has to be filled, often by Democrats and liberals, some of whom would fit better into the Republican Party of of fifty years ago.
Reagan expressed that concept when he said that he had not left the Democratic Party, but that it had left him. During his lifetime, it was moving to the left while the Republicans absorbed some (but not all) of a center that is both coveted by the moderate members of each party and reviled by the extremists.
The world of politics is not going mad. It's always been that way.
You bring up a valid point. Right now the move to the Libertarian I think is where the void fillers are now heading. The Green Party and those others, I can't even remember all their names now, are still non-entities, which is sad, there should be more than two competing parties and a wider variation in candidates.

Many of the moderates are remaining unaffiliated, not choosing sides and counted as swing voters until the candidates are selected. Honestly I think everyone should do that. I am actually wondering if our government is not somehow trying to phase out the Republican party, leaving only one major party and thus reducing the number of options. The more extreme the Republicans get, the more voters that leave the party, you'd think that if the party wanted to keep voters they'd become less extreme, and I don't think they're really that stupid to not realize what's pushing voters away.

I honestly believe that Bush was expected to lose, but since he won they just told him to shut up and do what he was told. Sounds conspiracy nutter to word it like that since "they" can mean so many things. But it's the only way I can wrap my head around his presidency and how he managed to not blow us all up.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#69
May 29, 2012
 
"Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for." ~ Will Rogers

"There ought to be one day-- just one-- when there is open season on senators." ~ Will Rogers

"This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer." ~ Will Rogers

"The more you read and observe about this Politics thing, you got to admit that each party is worse than the other. The one that's out always looks the best." ~ Will Rogers

"I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." ~ Will Rogers

Since: Dec 10

Fogelsville, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#70
May 29, 2012
 
Why do the religious nuts constantly use sock puppets?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71
May 29, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The serpent was right wrote:
Why do the religious nuts constantly use sock puppets?
Because they have too few numbers to not use sock puppets.

Since: Dec 10

Fogelsville, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#72
May 29, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Because they have too few numbers to not use sock puppets.
Agreed. But it is very dishonest.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73
May 29, 2012
 
The serpent was right wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed. But it is very dishonest.
Have you ever known creatards to be honest? They have to lie and say there's no fossils. Zealots are pretty much all creatards.

Since: Jan 12

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#74
May 29, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

EdSed wrote:
That is much more in keeping with what I find anecdotally and from personal experience on the net and in private life.
Most Brits (like me) initially respond that Gays have Civil Partnerships giving them full and equal rights including the right to adopt children, so why do they need to use the word 'married'? When confronted with people who ask "would you mind if blacks or Jews were denied equal status as regards State marriage?" and the fact that most Gays find being limited to Civil Partnership discriminatory, most Brits accept Gays should have 'married' and equal rights.
Note: State marriage is not religious marriage.
I think it is probably true to say that most people in the UK favor Gay marriage. I feel sure that most people in the UK couldn't care less about Gay marriage (or religion).
the problem I have with civil unions/domestic partnerships is they aren't recognized in countries as marriage such as in Israel that only recognizes gay marriage and not civil unions. They are seen as second class marriages.

As someone who is bisexual I don't like seeing my gay community being treated like we are different.

The following list of heads of states that support marriage equality:

1.) President Barack Obama of the United States
2.) President Francois Hollande of France
3.) King Juan Carlos of Spain
4.) President Anibal Cavaco Silva of Portugal
5.) King Harald V of Norway
6.) Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands
7.) Prime Minister Johanna Sigurdardottir of Iceland
8.) Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen of Finland
9.) King Albert II of Belgium
10.) President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner of Argentina
11.) Prime Minister Sali Berisha of Albania
12.) Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker of Luxembourg
13.) Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt of Denmark
14.) Prime Minister John Key of New Zealand
15.) Prime Minister David Cameron of the United Kingdom

Since: Dec 10

Fogelsville, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#75
May 29, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you ever known creatards to be honest? They have to lie and say there's no fossils. Zealots are pretty much all creatards.
I guess after constantly lying to oneself, lying to others is easy.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#76
May 29, 2012
 
The serpent was right wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess after constantly lying to oneself, lying to others is easy.
And, I suspect, lying to oneself feels like truthtelling, so when the same lies are repeated to others, it feels like honesty. It's useful to see people both as they are and as they see themselves.
EdSed

Wishaw, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#77
May 29, 2012
 
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
And, I suspect, lying to oneself feels like truthtelling, so when the same lies are repeated to others, it feels like honesty. It's useful to see people both as they are and as they see themselves.
Sadly, I don't think it's always intentional lies. Perhaps the worst are those who believe what they say.
Aizoric

Selden, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#78
Jul 7, 2012
 

Judged:

1

You know what these laws mean? Under the North Carolina state constitution, Albert Einstein would have been unqualified to serve in public office... but Osama Bin Laden would have been.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#79
Jul 7, 2012
 
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Sadly, I don't think it's always intentional lies. Perhaps the worst are those who believe what they say.
After the unfact has been confronted, from then on its a lie. And the lies get more and more grandiose before the inevitable silence.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80
Aug 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Sadly, I don't think it's always intentional lies. Perhaps the worst are those who believe what they say.
That is called delusion, it's the same thing as thinking your imaginary friend is some all powerful creator and grants wishes.
Judge Julie Kepple

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81
Aug 15, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Your last point is so dead on. People in the US have this bad habit of changing the meanings of words to suite their own opinions too often.
OMG! OMFG! You mean it's not all right to change the meaning of words? Me and my coleagues we do it all the time in the courthouse... and the meanings of the laws too.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 61 - 80 of80
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••