Would you vote for a gay or atheist president?

[Platypus]

seriously?

I'd vote for Bush over a homophobe (well, thats impossible, but you get the point...)

but I think religious belief is less important then actual discriminatory philosophies.

[senatortombstone]

Would you vote for someone who is gay?
Would you vote for someone who is atheist?

Yes, but only if he were a republican

[WMS]

Yes/Maybe, although since that wasn't an option I voted Yes/No.

Depends on the type of atheist, really...

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

gay?  yes, provided they were a good leader

atheist?  Oh hell yea, that'd be a reason i was voting for them.  Probably very opened minded and knowledgable. 

[Keystone Phil]

Probably very opened minded and knowledgable. 

That infamous opedo happens to be an atheist. Did you read his ant-Christian posts and hear about his idea of feeding Christians to lions? Hmmmm maybe it's just me but I wouldn't call that guy "open minded."

[J. J.]

If you are asking if I would vote for someone Opeboesque, no.

[Gabu]

atheist?  Oh hell yea, that'd be a reason i was voting for them.  Probably very opened minded and knowledgable. 

I wouldn't say so.  There are some atheists who are atheists purely because that's what they feel makes sense.  Those are fine.  Then there are other atheists who are atheists because they hate Christians and the religious (I know one personally).  Those are kinda not.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Probably very opened minded and knowledgable. 

That infamous opedo happens to be an atheist. Did you read his ant-Christian posts and hear about his idea of feeding Christians to lions? Hmmmm maybe it's just me but I wouldn't call that guy "open minded."

That's opebo.  Open-mindedness leads many people to atheism/agnosticism. 

[John Dibble]

Probably very opened minded and knowledgable. 

That infamous opedo happens to be an atheist. Did you read his ant-Christian posts and hear about his idea of feeding Christians to lions? Hmmmm maybe it's just me but I wouldn't call that guy "open minded."

That's opebo.  Open-mindedness leads many people to atheism/agnosticism. 

Still, it is a logical fallacy to assume that being atheist/agnostic means one is open-minded.

[Gabu]

Probably very opened minded and knowledgable. 

That infamous opedo happens to be an atheist. Did you read his ant-Christian posts and hear about his idea of feeding Christians to lions? Hmmmm maybe it's just me but I wouldn't call that guy "open minded."

That's opebo.  Open-mindedness leads many people to atheism/agnosticism. 

I'm not atheist or agnostic, and to my knowledge I'm not exactly closed-minded.

Open-mindedness leads to a lot of things.  That doesn't mean that everyone who is at those destinations reached them by being open-minded.

[Nation]

I'd vote for a gay presidential candidate, but I'd have a difficult time voting for an atheist, unless he also happened to be a very moral individual, and respected the role that religion can (and should, IMO) play in government. All this despite the fact I believe morality and religion are very intertwined.

[nclib]

Yes/Yes, though sadly I heard that only 60% of the country would vote for a gay President and only 50% an atheist.

That is correct


Prior to the 1960's both women and blacks had less than 1/2 the nation that would vote for them

Prior to the 1940's catholics had less than 1/2 the nation that would vote for them

Prior to the 1950's Jews had less than 1/2 the nation that would vote for them

It is only a matter of time......

Good point, though I've heard that many atheists would not vote for an atheist president (for some reason).

[KEmperor]

Well, this is a fun thread of hate!

[Gustaf]

Well, this is a fun thread of hate!

Exactly my thoughts.

I voted yes/yes, though I'd be more hestitant when it comes to an atheist.

[12th Doctor]

Probably very opened minded and knowledgable. 

That infamous opedo happens to be an atheist. Did you read his ant-Christian posts and hear about his idea of feeding Christians to lions? Hmmmm maybe it's just me but I wouldn't call that guy "open minded."

That's opebo.  Open-mindedness leads many people to atheism/agnosticism. 

Bitterness toward life and God and a general distain for man kind leads a lot of people to atheism.

[MAS117]

Depends/Depends

[MHS2002]

Yes/Depends

[J-Mann]

Hmmm, difficult choice, but ultimately:

No/No

[Alcon]

Hmmm, difficult choice, but ultimately:

No/No

Why not? I'd be interesting to hear reasoning from a moderate. Would you vote for an agnostic who is not aggressively against religion?

[J-Mann]

Why not? I'd be interesting to hear reasoning from a moderate. Would you vote for an agnostic who is not aggressively against religion?

As tough as the choice was to make, it may be even harder to explain adequately.  If all else fails, the quick answer would be, "because that's the way I feel."  Something deeper inside, more akin to PBrunsel's answer, perhaps.  But quick answers don't reveal all, so...here goes:

I have nothing against gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgendered people, etc.  I had a gay roommate my freshman year of college, and we're still friends today.  I have several gay friends, too.  I'll fight tooth and nail so that homosexuals are not discriminated against, and have revealed such views at least a few times on this forum.

Still, I'm a big "family values/moral example" kind of voter.  I'm just more comfortable with the thought of a president who is also a family man with a wife, a couple of kids, and the experience of raising a family under his belt.  The president is a representative of the entire American populace, and I think a family-oriented president is better representative of that constituency than is a single gay man or one with a partner.  I think a gay president would have a really hard time being taken seriously - not necessarily by me, but by the public in general.  That's just the way it would probably be.  Assail that logic, if you will, but that's how I'd feel if a homosexual were on the ballot.  I wouldn't vote for him because of personal ideals.

As for the athiest: I think faith is a very important part of a president; very personal (and for the most part should be kept that way), in some respects, but also very important.  Faith gives us hope, and no matter the faith, I think it represents a shred of the president's world view.  I wouldn't limit myself to voting for only a Christian.  Joe Lieberman would probably make a fine president; some Muslims could do alright, too.  The faith shouldn't be too "in-your-face", since we don't want a national preacher, but I want a president who believes in something; namely something greater than himself.

As for the agnostic who isn't hostile to religion: still, no.  Being an agnostic signifies disaffection.  I prefer a president who is upbeat and optimistic.  Holding to a religion is such a strength, where agnoticism looks to me like someone who gives up too easily, whether that's true or not.

[Alcon]

I can understand that, but as an agnostic myself who is very upbeat, my atitude is that I am unsure if there is a God, but if there is I do not think he would damn people for being skeptical about faith. I do, however, hope there is one.

I understand being against those who have lost faith in life and religion, though.

I understand your feelings and won't go after your positions on homosexuality since really there is little to go after, after all.

[J-Mann]

I can understand that, but as an agnostic myself who is very upbeat, my atitude is that I am unsure if there is a God, but if there is I do not think he would damn people for being skeptical about faith. I do, however, hope there is one.

Certainly the disaffected and pessimistic agnostic is the stereotype, or the image that comes to my mind, anyway.  But I'm sure it's not always that way; maybe even never that way.  Hehe, I don't think you're damned, either - just not my first choice for President

[nclib]

I'm just more comfortable with the thought of a president who is also a family man with a wife...

So, would you be uncomfortable with a woman president?

[J-Mann]

I'm just more comfortable with the thought of a president who is also a family man with a wife...

So, would you be uncomfortable with a woman president?

<sigh> Thanks for roping me into a debate about semantics.  We've never had a woman president; therefore I wrote the sentence the way I did because that's the precedent that has been set, and also because I didn't want to have to write "him or her", "he or she", or "family man or family woman" in every sentence.  It was meant as a more general assessment than a subliminal critique against a woman president.

[ilikeverin]

I'm just more comfortable with the thought of a president who is also a family man with a wife, a couple of kids, and the experience of raising a family under his belt.

What about the thought of a president who is also a family man with a husband, a couple of [adopted/in vitro/whatever] kids, and the experience of raising a family under his belt?