Should atheists or progressives be allowed to hold office?

[NYcarbineer]

Elected officials have to take an oath to uphold the Constitution.

Atheists and progressives reject the Founders and believe that humans have no inherant rights beyond what the state decides on a whim; since they don't believe in the Constitution why should they be allowed to run for office?

You have no rights except those the State says you have.

 

[Syriusly]

Believing that requires that you reject what they wrote and stood for.

Religious requirements are specifically prohibited and here you are claiming that they meant the exact opposite (and ignoring every valid point brought up against this).

With such representations, I could make a far better argument that religious believers such as yourself should be barred from office long before atheists should.

The religious tests that were banned were intra-denominational tests. They simply assumed that anyone under consideration would be Judeo-Christian and believed in God.

No.

That is your assumption.

Why do you despise the actual words of the Constitution? Or is it you fear them?

Hahah, nice but silly try.

Todays interpretation of what the First Amendment means to protect the right to burn the flag or allow communists, atheists and such filth to hold high office would not be recognised by them as anything other than insanity and mass delusion, which it is.

Your interpretation that filth like you get to tell Americans that they are not real Americans because they don't believe in your insanity and mass delusion- and your insistence that to protect the United States- we must ignore the words of the United States Constitution is just another example of your bigotry and Fascism.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Believing that requires that you reject what they wrote and stood for.

Religious requirements are specifically prohibited and here you are claiming that they meant the exact opposite (and ignoring every valid point brought up against this).

With such representations, I could make a far better argument that religious believers such as yourself should be barred from office long before atheists should.

The religious tests that were banned were intra-denominational tests. They simply assumed that anyone under consideration would be Judeo-Christian and believed in God.

No.

That is your assumption.

Why do you despise the actual words of the Constitution? Or is it you fear them?

Hahah, nice but silly try.

Todays interpretation of what the First Amendment means to protect the right to burn the flag or allow communists, atheists and such filth to hold high office would not be recognised by them as anything other than insanity and mass delusion, which it is.

Your interpretation that filth like you get to tell Americans that they are not real Americans because they don't believe in your insanity and mass delusion- and your insistence that to protect the United States- we must ignore the words of the United States Constitution is just another example of your bigotry and Fascism.

No, but instead the meaning and intent of the Founding Fathers did not leave room for atheistic pukes and communists to hold high office in our Republic.

Period, call me what you like, you and I both kn ow that the current Democratic party would haver been denounced as Copperheads if not entirely rounded up and thrown into federal prisons for sedition.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Elected officials have to take an oath to uphold the Constitution.

Atheists and progressives reject the Founders and believe that humans have no inherant rights beyond what the state decides on a whim; since they don't believe in the Constitution why should they be allowed to run for office?

You have no rights except those the State says you have.

You are an idiot and a mental slave.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The Founding Fathers did not consider atheism to be a religion, dumbass.

Atheism isn't a religion. But the Constitution didn't say that office holder's must have a religion- or even believe in some god(apparently any god)
The brilliant writers of our Constitution knew about religious fanatics who wanted to dictate religion to everyone- you know- like you do.

So they put into the Constitution protections against people like you:

shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

These are the words you want to ignore- whether it is because you despise the Constitution, or fear it- I don't know

Oh bullshit.

No one would have allowed an atheist to hold public office in 1788 and you know it or you are an ignoramus if you dont.

That is our mistake, to tolerate public office by people who want to undermine and commit sedition against his God given Republic.

 

[HenryBHough]

I must agree about the atheist proposal being unconstitutional.

But progressives?

That's tricky - I haven't fully explored whether The U.S. Constitution says much about the criminally insane being eligible or not.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Progressives yes, atheists no.

An atheist cannot seriously take the oath of office as it is meaningless to them as anything more than a mere pledge.

The idiots that laugh at my observation are simply in denial as the obvious truth of the matter is that no atheist can seriously take an oath 'so help me God.' That is meaningless to them, as their values system itself is a meaningless sham.

 

[Lakhota]

Believing in supernatural entities like God, Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy are much the same - except that most children grow out of three of them. At least three of them actually deliver.

 

[Lakhota]

Progressives yes, atheists no.

An atheist cannot seriously take the oath of office as it is meaningless to them as anything more than a mere pledge.

The idiots that laugh at my observation are simply in denial as the obvious truth of the matter is that no atheist can seriously take an oath 'so help me God.' That is meaningless to them, as their values system itself is a meaningless sham.

'So help me Santa' makes more sense. Santa actually delivers.

 

[Syriusly]

Believing that requires that you reject what they wrote and stood for.

Religious requirements are specifically prohibited and here you are claiming that they meant the exact opposite (and ignoring every valid point brought up against this).

With such representations, I could make a far better argument that religious believers such as yourself should be barred from office long before atheists should.

The religious tests that were banned were intra-denominational tests. They simply assumed that anyone under consideration would be Judeo-Christian and believed in God.

No.

That is your assumption.

Why do you despise the actual words of the Constitution? Or is it you fear them?

Hahah, nice but silly try.

Todays interpretation of what the First Amendment means to protect the right to burn the flag or allow communists, atheists and such filth to hold high office would not be recognised by them as anything other than insanity and mass delusion, which it is.

From the dissensions among Sects themselves arise necessarily a right of choosing and necessity of deliberating to which we will conform. But if we choose for ourselves, we must allow others to choose also, and so reciprocally, this establishes religious liberty.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers, 1:545

What Jim believes- not what Jefferson believed.

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.


[N]o man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom (1779), quoted from Merrill D Peterson, ed, Thomas Jefferson: Writings (1984), p. 347

And here- Jefferson explicitly notes that freedom of religion includes non-belief in religion- and notes that what Jim calls for undermines all of our civil rights.

Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of an established religion tends to make the clergy unresponsive to their own people, and leads to corruption within religion itself. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society.
We have solved, by fair experiment, the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries.
-- Thomas Jefferson, to the Virginia Baptists (1808) ME 16:320.

 

[HenryBHough]

Believing in supernatural entities like God, Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy are much the same - except that most children grow out of three of them. At least three of them actually deliver.

You left out The Golf Fairy!

Losing faith in Obama?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Progressives yes, atheists no.

An atheist cannot seriously take the oath of office as it is meaningless to them as anything more than a mere pledge.

The idiots that laugh at my observation are simply in denial as the obvious truth of the matter is that no atheist can seriously take an oath 'so help me God.' That is meaningless to them, as their values system itself is a meaningless sham.

'So help me Santa' makes more sense. Santa actually delivers.

That you think Santa is more believable than the Creator, just proves what an imbecile you are.

The advance made with the acceptance of Monotheism has been one of the greatest advances in human culture and Western civilization ever made, and our concept of the laws of science are derived from the concept that the Creator is intelligent and His handiwork reflects the rationality and order of an intelligent mind. The success that has been made with that working set of assumption/axioms that we live in an orderly universe whose behavior can be expressed in cognitive terms is what makes modern science possible and the advancement of atheism undermines that framework and pushes us toward the brink of an anarchistic world view where everything is subjective, there are no laws, no Truths and thus everyone can have their opinion on everything because no Truth is superior to anyone else version of the Truth on the same topic.

 

[Lakhota]

Progressives yes, atheists no.

An atheist cannot seriously take the oath of office as it is meaningless to them as anything more than a mere pledge.

The idiots that laugh at my observation are simply in denial as the obvious truth of the matter is that no atheist can seriously take an oath 'so help me God.' That is meaningless to them, as their values system itself is a meaningless sham.

'So help me Santa' makes more sense. Santa actually delivers.

That you think Santa is more believable than the Creator, just proves what an imbecile you are.

The advance made with the acceptance of Monotheism has been one of the greatest advances in human culture and Western civilization ever made, and our concept of the laws of science are derived from the concept that the Creator is intelligent and His handiwork reflects the rationality and order of an intelligent mind. The success that has been made with that working set of assumption/axioms that we live in an orderly universe whose behavior can be expressed in cognitive terms is what makes modern science possible and the advancement of atheism undermines that framework and pushes us toward the brink of an anarchistic world view where everything is subjective, there are no laws, no Truths and thus everyone can have their opinion on everything because no Truth is superior to anyone else version of the Truth on the same topic.

If believing all that supernatural bullshit, without any proof, makes your life better - good for you. What is your prayer success rate?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Believing that requires that you reject what they wrote and stood for.

Religious requirements are specifically prohibited and here you are claiming that they meant the exact opposite (and ignoring every valid point brought up against this).

With such representations, I could make a far better argument that religious believers such as yourself should be barred from office long before atheists should.

The religious tests that were banned were intra-denominational tests. They simply assumed that anyone under consideration would be Judeo-Christian and believed in God.

No.

That is your assumption.

Why do you despise the actual words of the Constitution? Or is it you fear them?

Hahah, nice but silly try.

Todays interpretation of what the First Amendment means to protect the right to burn the flag or allow communists, atheists and such filth to hold high office would not be recognised by them as anything other than insanity and mass delusion, which it is.

From the dissensions among Sects themselves arise necessarily a right of choosing and necessity of deliberating to which we will conform. But if we choose for ourselves, we must allow others to choose also, and so reciprocally, this establishes religious liberty.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers, 1:545

What Jim believes- not what Jefferson believed.

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.


[N]o man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom (1779), quoted from Merrill D Peterson, ed, Thomas Jefferson: Writings (1984), p. 347

And here- Jefferson explicitly notes that freedom of religion includes non-belief in religion- and notes that what Jim calls for undermines all of our civil rights.

Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of an established religion tends to make the clergy unresponsive to their own people, and leads to corruption within religion itself. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society.
We have solved, by fair experiment, the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries.
-- Thomas Jefferson, to the Virginia Baptists (1808) ME 16:320.

While T Jefferson held man y unorthodox Christian beliefs, he was nonetheless a Christian.

The religion of Thomas Jefferson, third U.S. President
In a practical sense, classifying Jefferson as a "Deist" with regards to religious affiliation is misleading and meaningless. Jefferson was never affiliated with any organized Deist movement. This is a word that describes a theological position more than an actual religious affiliation, and as such it is of limited use from a sociologicalperspective. If one defines the term "Deist" broadly enough, then the writing of nearly every U.S. president or prominent historical figure could be used to classify them as a "Deist," so classifying people as such without at least some evidence of nominal self-identification is not very useful.

Although Jefferson's specific denominational and congregational ties were limited in his adulthood and his ever-evolving theological beliefs were distinctively his own, he was without a doubt a Protestant.

Jefferson's Religious Beliefs | Thomas Jefferson's Monticello
I have little doubt that the whole of our country will soon be rallied to the Unity of the Creator, and, I hope, to the pure doctrines of Jesus also."14

1823 April 11. (Jefferson to John Adams). "The truth is that the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus are those calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them for the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away all this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this the most venerated reformer of human errors."

Thomas Jefferson, like every other Protestant of his time would not have agreed to an atheist holding a high public office no more than they would have agreed to the fitness of a lunatic or a pedophile.

Like it or not that is the Truth.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Progressives yes, atheists no.

An atheist cannot seriously take the oath of office as it is meaningless to them as anything more than a mere pledge.

The idiots that laugh at my observation are simply in denial as the obvious truth of the matter is that no atheist can seriously take an oath 'so help me God.' That is meaningless to them, as their values system itself is a meaningless sham.

'So help me Santa' makes more sense. Santa actually delivers.

That you think Santa is more believable than the Creator, just proves what an imbecile you are.

The advance made with the acceptance of Monotheism has been one of the greatest advances in human culture and Western civilization ever made, and our concept of the laws of science are derived from the concept that the Creator is intelligent and His handiwork reflects the rationality and order of an intelligent mind. The success that has been made with that working set of assumption/axioms that we live in an orderly universe whose behavior can be expressed in cognitive terms is what makes modern science possible and the advancement of atheism undermines that framework and pushes us toward the brink of an anarchistic world view where everything is subjective, there are no laws, no Truths and thus everyone can have their opinion on everything because no Truth is superior to anyone else version of the Truth on the same topic.

If believing all that supernatural bullshit, without any proof, makes your life better - good for you. What is your prayer success rate?

There is plenty of proof and my prayer rate is 100% as I pray for God's Will to be done, dude.

 

[Lakhota]

Progressives yes, atheists no.

An atheist cannot seriously take the oath of office as it is meaningless to them as anything more than a mere pledge.

The idiots that laugh at my observation are simply in denial as the obvious truth of the matter is that no atheist can seriously take an oath 'so help me God.' That is meaningless to them, as their values system itself is a meaningless sham.

'So help me Santa' makes more sense. Santa actually delivers.

That you think Santa is more believable than the Creator, just proves what an imbecile you are.

The advance made with the acceptance of Monotheism has been one of the greatest advances in human culture and Western civilization ever made, and our concept of the laws of science are derived from the concept that the Creator is intelligent and His handiwork reflects the rationality and order of an intelligent mind. The success that has been made with that working set of assumption/axioms that we live in an orderly universe whose behavior can be expressed in cognitive terms is what makes modern science possible and the advancement of atheism undermines that framework and pushes us toward the brink of an anarchistic world view where everything is subjective, there are no laws, no Truths and thus everyone can have their opinion on everything because no Truth is superior to anyone else version of the Truth on the same topic.

If believing all that supernatural bullshit, without any proof, makes your life better - good for you. What is your prayer success rate?

There is plenty of proof and my prayer rate is 100% as I pray for God's Will to be done, dude.

What proof? No one has EVER been able to offer any credible proof. By proof - I mean that TRUTH you were talking about. It's all based on "faith"...

 

[JimBowie1958]

The idiots that laugh at my observation are simply in denial as the obvious truth of the matter is that no atheist can seriously take an oath 'so help me God.' That is meaningless to them, as their values system itself is a meaningless sham.

'So help me Santa' makes more sense. Santa actually delivers.

That you think Santa is more believable than the Creator, just proves what an imbecile you are.

The advance made with the acceptance of Monotheism has been one of the greatest advances in human culture and Western civilization ever made, and our concept of the laws of science are derived from the concept that the Creator is intelligent and His handiwork reflects the rationality and order of an intelligent mind. The success that has been made with that working set of assumption/axioms that we live in an orderly universe whose behavior can be expressed in cognitive terms is what makes modern science possible and the advancement of atheism undermines that framework and pushes us toward the brink of an anarchistic world view where everything is subjective, there are no laws, no Truths and thus everyone can have their opinion on everything because no Truth is superior to anyone else version of the Truth on the same topic.

If believing all that supernatural bullshit, without any proof, makes your life better - good for you. What is your prayer success rate?

There is plenty of proof and my prayer rate is 100% as I pray for God's Will to be done, dude.

What proof? No one has EVER been able to offer any credible proof. By proof - I mean that TRUTH you were talking about. It's all based on "faith"...

No one has been able to offer proof of God?

Lol, as if Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas never were born, roflmao.

No, your IGNORANCE of the proof of Gods existence proves nothing more than what an imbecile you are.

 

[Lakhota]

'So help me Santa' makes more sense. Santa actually delivers.

That you think Santa is more believable than the Creator, just proves what an imbecile you are.

The advance made with the acceptance of Monotheism has been one of the greatest advances in human culture and Western civilization ever made, and our concept of the laws of science are derived from the concept that the Creator is intelligent and His handiwork reflects the rationality and order of an intelligent mind. The success that has been made with that working set of assumption/axioms that we live in an orderly universe whose behavior can be expressed in cognitive terms is what makes modern science possible and the advancement of atheism undermines that framework and pushes us toward the brink of an anarchistic world view where everything is subjective, there are no laws, no Truths and thus everyone can have their opinion on everything because no Truth is superior to anyone else version of the Truth on the same topic.

If believing all that supernatural bullshit, without any proof, makes your life better - good for you. What is your prayer success rate?

There is plenty of proof and my prayer rate is 100% as I pray for God's Will to be done, dude.

What proof? No one has EVER been able to offer any credible proof. By proof - I mean that TRUTH you were talking about. It's all based on "faith"...

No one has been able to offer proof of God?

Lol, as if Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas never were born, roflmao.

No, your IGNORANCE of the proof of Gods existence proves nothing more than what an imbecile you are.

Just cut the bullshit and offer some "credible" proof of ANY God. Christianity is nothing more than a copycat religion.

10 Christ-like Figures Who Pre-Date Jesus - Listverse

 

[IndependantAce]

Elected officials have to take an oath to uphold the Constitution.

Atheists and progressives reject the Founders and believe that humans have no inherant rights beyond what the state decides on a whim; since they don't believe in the Constitution why should they be allowed to run for office?

You have no rights except those the State says you have.

That provide point; since you reject the concept of inalienable rights which the Constitution was founded on, how can those who think like you hold office and take an oath to uphold the Constitution when you admit that you hate it and want to destroy it in favor of totalitarian socialism?

 

[IndependantAce]

Just cut the bullshit and offer some "credible" proof of ANY God.

10 Christ-like Figures Who Pre-Date Jesus - Listverse

Physicists Find Evidence That The Universe Is A 'Giant Brain'