Zguy28 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Does religion matter to you at all in politics? Do you consider it when choosing a candidate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Yes. As a non-Christian I accept that 99% of all candidates will be Christian, and that's fine. Normally I don't even think about that when I vote. But if one is TOO Christian (or at least, evokes his Christianity very often when campaigning), that scares me. Huckabee scares me, for example. I like to think our leaders think of themselves as Americans first and Christians/Jews/Muslims/whatever second. But this is especially true for Christians, because they have much more power than the rest of us already. Sorry Christians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 For me it is an element that I look at in a candidate, but it is not the be-all and end-all of what I look at in any way. I use it as a way to try and determine how faithful an individual is to the ideals they claim to believe in, and what those ideals may actually be. For example.... if I were to see a supposedly devout RC candidate who had 4 marriages, or 2 children out of wedlock, or something similar, I'd suggest that they really weren't necessarily interested in backing their purported beliefs with actions and it would put many of their other platforms in question in my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I won't say it doesn't matter at all, but it is something I have ever yet to actually vote on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Yes. As a non-Christian I accept that 99% of all candidates will be Christian, and that's fine. Normally I don't even think about that when I vote. But if one is TOO Christian (or at least, evokes his Christianity very often when campaigning), that scares me. Huckabee scares me, for example. I like to think our leaders think of themselves as Americans first and Christians/Jews/Muslims/whatever second. But this is especially true for Christians, because they have much more power than the rest of us already.Sorry Christians. This is exactly how i feel. I dont want my leaders basing their decisions on a 2000 year old book loaded with contradictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttr77 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Yes. As a non-Christian I accept that 99% of all candidates will be Christian, and that's fine. Normally I don't even think about that when I vote. But if one is TOO Christian (or at least, evokes his Christianity very often when campaigning), that scares me. Huckabee scares me, for example. I like to think our leaders think of themselves as Americans first and Christians/Jews/Muslims/whatever second. But this is especially true for Christians, because they have much more power than the rest of us already.Sorry Christians. I second this. EDIT: Third this. Sorry PleaseBlitz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I said it doesn't matter at all, but I suppose I'm lying a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 Does anybody believe any of the candidates are hypocritical with regards to their professed religions? In other words, do their actions not reflect what they claim for their faith? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I voted not at all, but I guess to be completely honest, people who kowtow to religious groups frighten me/turn me off. Of course, the same goes for people who constantly play the class warfare or the race card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 It only matters to me in that I despise the candidates who use religion as a political tool to gain power, or those who talk about "religion and government" as if the establishment clause does not exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Im not a militant atheist like some so it doesnt matter to me. I'm pro life from born to prison... death penalty only if you have life already. I want gays to be able to get married and enjoy the pain that is divorce like me. I've been married twice, who am i to tell someone they'd ruin the sanctity..... Free speech = hard to listen to... you have to put up with it or its not real... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thanos Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Not for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparkleMotion Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Does anybody believe any of the candidates are hypocritical with regards to their professed religions?In other words, do their actions not reflect what they claim for their faith? I'd say preemptively starting a war should be scratched off of most true Christians' list of options as President. "Blessed are the peacemakers" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I'd say preemptively starting a war should be scratched off of most true Christians' list of options as President."Blessed are the peacemakers" As well as every Republican who wants to cut taxes for the rich, and reduce spending on programs for the poor. Oh yea, that's every republican. Blessed are the Poor, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Blessed are the Poor, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Premise 1: Cutting social programs and reducing hurts the poor by enhancing the rich/poor gap and making the poor's poverty worse. Premise 2: The Bible says blessed are the Poor. Conclusion: Republicans love the poor. They want the poor to be blessed. It's the Democrats that hate the poor by attempting to steal their blessings. P.S. Premise one is fatally flawed, and thus your criticism of Christians that want to reduce taxes and trim spending is misplaced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Yes but just a little if the candidate is sound on the scientific side of things. Yes it is a priority number one if the candidate is Huckabee. Do not believe in Evolution = not fit for office Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 I'd say preemptively starting a war should be scratched off of most true Christians' list of options as President."Blessed are the peacemakers" I would agree. That's why I stated yesterday that if Huckabee truly wants this nation to reflect Biblical values, its foreign policy of retaliation to attacks would have to go as well. :2cents:As well as every Republican who wants to cut taxes for the rich, and reduce spending on programs for the poor. Oh yea, that's every republican.Blessed are the Poor, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. I agree. But the quotation is "Blessed are the poor in spirit..."What about Obama, who claims to be Roman Catholic yet voted to allow partial birth abortion? Not quite the normal catholic stance eh? By the way, does anybody know when he became catholic? Wasn't he part of a Muslim youth group? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 Yes but just a little if the candidate is sound on the scientific side of things.Yes it is a priority number one if the candidate is Huckabee. Do not believe in Evolution = not fit for office What does not believing in evolution have to do with being President? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Are there any Mormons here that can explain the whole sacred underpants thing to me? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I would agree. That's why I stated yesterday that if Huckabee truly wants this nation to reflect Biblical values, its foreign policy of retaliation to attacks would have to go as well. :2cents:I agree. But the quotation is "Blessed are the poor in spirit..." What about Obama, who claims to be Roman Catholic yet voted to allow partial birth abortion? Not quite the normal catholic stance eh? By the way, does anybody know when he became catholic? Wasn't he part of a Muslim youth group? Yea, Poor in spirit, poor... I think its the same. As to Obama, I think you are missing something, so let me try to explain. I am Roman Catholic, but I am also pro-choice (edited that!). Its not because I'm hypocritical. Its because I am able to say that I have my own views that I apply to myself, BUT at the same time I realize that the laws of the US should not reflect any religion's beliefs. So, would I ever advocate an abortion of a child of mine, NO. But, I also believe that the Constitution says people have a right to privacy and that abortion falls within that right. Not hypocritical, just complex. :2cents: Just one question for you too, Z. I think you agree with me about the treatment of the poor and the failure of the Republican party (in general) in that regard. But, do you think that when you weigh the values of religion that you would like to see instilled in the US government, you rank abortion as the number 1 issue? And if so, why? Why is abortion more important than being generous to the poor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 What does not believing in evolution have to do with being President? In terms of impact the science policy is up there with foreign relations, economy, etc.... (and rapidly rising) America simply cannot afford to carry on the religion-driven science policy, especially in the context of the religion-science relationship as we see it in issues related to Creationism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 it only matters to me if they bring it into politics. keep it out of politics and i don't care if your a scientologist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 In terms of impact the science policy is up there with foreign relations, economy, etc.... (and rapidly rising)Again, what does evolution have to do with it?Does not believing in evolution mean you automatically despise the EPA, don't believe in global warming, and want people to suffer needlessly from disease? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Again, what does evolution have to do with it?Does not believing in evolution mean you automatically despise the EPA, don't believe in global warming, and want people to suffer needlessly from disease? A statement "I do not believe in Evolution" by a Presidential candidate is more than just a statement of belief, it is a statement of policy. There is no conflict between the science and the religion. As a Christian you do not have to reject Evolution. We need a President who understands and champions that approach. Our country needs it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 Yea, Poor in spirit, poor... I think its the same. As to Obama, I think you are missing something, so let me try to explain. I am Roman Catholic, but I am also pro-choice (edited that!). Its not because I'm hypocritical. Its because I am able to say that I have my own views that I apply to myself, BUT at the same time I realize that the laws of the US should not reflect any religion's beliefs. So, would I ever advocate an abortion of a child of mine, NO. But, I also believe that the Constitution says people have a right to privacy and that abortion falls within that right. Not hypocritical, just complex. :2cents: Good answer. Personally, I believe Roe should be overturned, but not to outlaw abortion outright (although that would make me happy!). I firmly believe that it is a State matter and not federal at all.Just one question for you too, Z. I think you agree with me about the treatment of the poor and the failure of the Republican party (in general) in that regard. But, do you think that when you weigh the values of religion that you would like to see instilled in the US government, you rank abortion as the number 1 issue? And if so, why? Why is abortion more important than being generous to the poor?They are both important issues, but I don't rank abortion as my primary issue with regards to elections anymore since I believe it is being used as a perpetual political platform issue to get votes and will never be resolved.Also, it usually ranks higher because death is always "permanent" while being poor always is not. Hard to explain it with out coming off as not caring about the poor. Maybe if I said, the unborn victims of abortion are the poorest at all, because they have nothing, not even the opportunity to live.:2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.