Bru and Writer:

Once again, you distort what I said.  I did not miss Bru’s point about 1789.  But I repeat now - for the third (or maybe fourth) time - that my comments (and follow-ups) were made ONLY in response to the question of why this country is UNLIKELY (Writer: I NEVER said “never”) to vote for an atheist candidate.

In this regard, I never suggested that religion did not “morph” (as Bru suggests) into something truly obnoxious (right-wing fundamental evangelicalism) from something arguably more “benign.”  It obviously did, and had an increasingly negative impact on politics; though, to be historically accurate, this did not truly begin to occur until the 1970s/80s, with the advent of Falwell, Robertson, Buchanan and the Moral Majority.

Writer: You make the same mistake that so many rabid atheists make: that faith takes only two forms, at the extremes: deism on the one hand, and fundamentalism on the other.  Yet most believers fall squarely in the middle.

Your comment about the candidates is of a piece with this - that there are only two positions: “adopt a faith” or “true believer.”  While it may occur that a candidate cynically “adopts” faith for political gain, this is a rarity (in fact, can you give me a provable example?).

Most of the presidential candidates - both Democrats and Republicans - are sincere in their faiths.  The only difference is that the Republican candidates wear it on their sleeves.  Clinton (lifelong United Methodist), Edwards (originally Baptist, now United Methodist) and Obama (United Church of Christ, since college) did not cynically “adopt” their religions, but neither are they the type of “true believers” you refer to (Huckabee, Romney et al).  They are believers who have practiced their faith quietly and privately - until it became an issue.  And isn’t that the way you would WANT it - and that it SHOULD be?

Re “the lesser of two evils,” did you consider (or would you have considered; I don’t know how old you are) JFK the “lesser of two evils” since he was a Catholic?  Indeed, how many presidential choices have you made in your voting history in which you felt you had to vote for the “lesser of two evils,” specifically vis-a-vis religion?

Finally, your comment that “In this environment, our hypothetical admitted atheist candidate displays a courage, honesty, and intellectual independence that the others can only envy from afar” insinuates that ALL people of faith are incapable of “courage, honesty and intellectual independence.”  That may be true of some, perhaps even many.  But to make such a broad-brush generalization is blatantly insulting - to say nothing of insupportable.

Peace.

BruSays:

Hmmm…  To paraphrase Shakespeare, “Methinks thou dost protest too much”...and are too caught up in semantics.  I suppose I would be happy to modify my statement by saying that “most of the early colonies from which this country was founded were themselves founded by religious refugees.”  Happy?  LOL.

Also, since you pickd 1789 as your “target” year, let’s look at that, why don’t we?

According to historical estimates, the population of the newly-minted U.S. in 1789 was ~4 million.  Of that number, fully half were of British descent - and we already know that the early British settlers were either Church of England (Jamestown) or “Protestant” refugees (Plymouth).  New British arrivals would likely have been one or the other as well.

Of the remaining half, fully 750,000 were African (overwhelmingly slaves), and, as noted, slaves came over with whatever religious or quasi-religious belief systems they had, but most were quickly Christianized.

The largest number after that were a combination of Scottish and Irish, the vast majority of whom would most certainly have been Catholic.

Thus, ~3/4 of the population by 1789 were Church of England, Protestant, Catholic or converted (willingly or not…) to Christianity.

The remaining 1/4 of the population - German (~250,000), Netherlands (~100,000), France (~15,000) and others - consisted of a variety of faiths and non-faith.

Thus, by narrowing it down to a single year, you have actually ended up putting your foot even further down your throat.  LOL.

Peace.

BruSays:

Well…

Jamestown was indeed the first settlement, pedating Plymouth by about 12 years.  However, not that among the original 12 “council” members of the colony was Chaplain Robert Hunt, who “gave the first prayer at Cape Henry in 1607, and held open-air services at Jamestown until shelter and a more appropriate church were built there.”  Thus, while not religious “refugees,” the Jamestown settlers were also “faith-based” people.  Thus, both of the first colonies were founded by “believers,” and, as noted, this ethos remained as (i) these colonies grew, (ii) new colonies were formed, (iii) newly gotten African slaves were Christianized, (iv) “manifest destiny” spread the (primarily Protestant) religious ethos through the country, and (v) new immigrants came (Irish, Italian, Dutch et al), bringing with them their own faith-based beliefs.

Thus, neither you nor Tim has provided any evidence to refute my original claim: that this country - and not just its several original colonies - was “founded” by believers (of whatever stripe) and, because of this, the country has remained heavily “faith-based,” which is why, historically, it is unlikely that an atheist will be elected president.

All that said, I agree (and have done so consistently here) with your back-to-the-point premise that there should be no religious test for anyone to hold elected office in this country (a situation vis-a-vis atheists that I have lamented elsewhere on this thread, and continue to lament).

Peace.

PRGP:

Your post is filled with presumptions about me, and misunderstandings of my words and intent.

First, I never once suggested that this was a “Christian nation.”  I was originally responding to someone else who lamented that this country is unlikely ever to elect an atheist president, and I was simply pointing out that, from a historical perspective, this is because the country was founded by “believers” (of all types, not only Christians), and this “ethos” has persisted throughout the past three hundred or so years.  I also acknowledged that the founders were NOT Christian (a point I made twice), but deists, who believed in a “Creator” but not necessarily in any “organized” religion.  To interpret from all this that I somehow believe that the U.S. is a “Christian nation” is a leap of illogic that I doubt anyone else would support.

As for my own faith, it might surprise you to know that I was raised in an atheist Jewish household by an ultra-leftist father (for whom religion was “the opium of the masses”) and a Ph.D. scientist empiricist mother (for whom religion is just “so much hooey.”).  So I was neither indoctrinated, nor did I come to my faith through “fear or peer pressure.”  Indeed, though I know you will scoff (since you seem to do it so well), I came to my faith as a natural outgrowth of my rationalist, scientific, empiricist upbringing (i.e., NOT as a “reaction” to it; i.e., some sort of “rebellion”) - via an intensive eight-year study of comparative religion, and a “calling” that it would be far to difficult to try to explain to you, since you have neither the language nor the open-mindedness to understand it.  (Sorry for the harshness of that; there was simply no other way to say it.)

Nor have I rejected the 20 years prior to my becoming a believer.  I remain grounded in the scientific method vis-a-vis explanations of the natural world, and can discuss/debate physics, cosmology, geology, archeology, paleontology, biology, Darwinian theory and quantum physics (among others) with the best of them.

As an sdide, what is ironic - even amusing - about the postion that you (and many others) take is that my belief system has plenty of room for yours, while yours has zero room for mine.

I would like to end by quoting from a letter to the editor that I just read in a scientific magazine, written by an MD who is an atheist-cum-“reluctant agnostic”: “Agnosticism is about what one KNOWS, or professes to know; atheism is about what one BELIEVES.  When atheists, enamored of their self-rectitude, fail to recognize or allow any distinction between their knowledge and their belief, they, like the religious fanatics they rail against, become zealots.” (Emphasis original)

This is a perfect description of otherwise venerable scientists like Dawkins, Dennett, Harris et al (who even my NAS-level empiricist scientist rabid atheist mother cannot abide.)  By refusing to “hold the line” between their knowledge and their belief - by conflating the two - they come across as hopelessly fanatical polemicists and zealots, and by doing so not only hurt (if not openly undermine) their own cause (some of which I support), but bring disgrace to science and the scientific method.

Peace.

Hey Prgp, check it out!!!
” woe to those who fall into the hands of a living God”
It really doesn’t matter whether or not you believe in God.  One day you will find out for yourself, by then it will be too late. 
“Every knee shall bow, and every mouth shall confess”
I am a saved christian, I have faith in knowing when I die where I will go. It is not out of fear, that I became a christian.  It was out of being brought up in Mormon home.  I have seen, what a cult can do to people.  I wanted to know the truth, and I found it.  What have you found?  Do you know where you will be after you die?  Do you have any faith at all?  It sounds as if you are the frightened one?  I pray that one day, you might know God, before you die, before it is too late.

PRGP.
” woe to those who fall into the hands of a living God”
It really doesn’t matter whether or not you believe in God.  One day you will find out for yourself, by then it will be too late. 
“Every knee shall bow, and every mouth shall confess”
I am a saved christian, I have faith in knowing when I die where I will go. It is not out of fear, that I became a christian.  It was out of being brought up in Mormon home.  I have seen, what a cult can do to people.  I wanted to know the truth, and I found it.  What have you found?  Do you know where you will be after you die?  Do you have any faith at all?  It sounds as if you are the frightened one?  I pray that one day, you might know God, before you die, before it is too late.

Tim:

Name-calling is neither necessary nor does it add weight to your claims.

The land included in the Louisiana Purchase was originally a French colony (1682-1762) and then a Spanish colony (1762-1802).  The vast majority of the people who settled there under both flags were Catholic.  As well, the other non-Native American populations (Mediterranean, Caribbean, African, Mexicans) all had one form of faith/religion or another (the Mexicans also having been Catholicized early on).

Thus, when we purchased it in 1802/1803, the vast majority of the population of that area was ALSO faith-based, either Catholic (the majority) or other, and they were added to the already heavily (if not solely) faith-based settlers.

Imported slaves also had their own original faiths (various African belief systems), and the Native Americans, of course, have the second earliest faith in the world: the Great Spirit belief.

Thus, almost everyone in what became the continental U.S. - early European settlers, the French/Spanish and island people in “Louisiana,” the slaves brought over from Africa (a majority of whom, by the way, we quickly converted to Protestant), and the indigenous Native Americans - were all “believers” in a God or other superior being, and the vast majority were either Catholic or Protestant.  Thus, I stand by my claim that this is historically why this country is unlikely to elect an atheist president.

Next time, try doing a little more research before you (i) make broad claims without support, and (ii) insult those who disagree with you.

Finally, are you suggesting that many (perhaps even most) believers are not “educated people?”  Such a claim is also insupportable.  And any time you wish to engage in a discussion/debate on science, philosophy, psychology - or whatever other subjects you consider “educated” - feel free.  And I can assure you that all of my faith-based friends and colleagues could hold their own against (or best) you in any such discussion, using only facts, logic, reason and empirical data.

Indeed, you might want to reconsider that statement and show a little humility yourself, as well as learning how to govern your passions so they do not override your reasoning.

Peace.

Manni,

You are an idiot. This “country” was NOT founded by persecuted religious idiots, there is a hell of a lot more to it than that. Those ‘people’ found one tiny part of this country, aside from that they have entered the national mythology via the Thanksgiving holiday.

How about the Louisiana purchase (a hole different breed of colonists I assure you)? Imported slaves? The NATIVE population? European immigrants of the 19th century? These people played a much larger actual role in forming this country.

Like it or not, religion plays no role in the intelligentsia at all and it no longer informs or directs culture in any way.  It’s over and it’s gone. Religion is now widely and correctly considered lunacy by most educated people.

Sin has many elements, greed, hate, enevy, jealously and more. Many people whom claim that one sin us worse than another, are usually trying too claim their sin is not so bad. But the truth is all sin has a number of elements and that is the truth that is seldom accknowledged. Sinners know down deep that they are guilty of sin, yet many of us, will mask our sin with feeling of pity for ourselves and other that we love, we convince ourselves that it is not so bad. The bible, God’s Word says repent, and sin no more, when a person of faith receives the holy spirit- the spirit of God himself, he feels guilty when he sins, he knows God’s Spirit and will repent. When a beleiver repents, he understands that God’s hand is on him, making him strong enough to over come sin. That is the spirit of God. That is God’s healing power, The power of God that heals one’s soul, the beleiver’s faith grows very strong and he becomes christ- like, because of the Spirit of God.
Amen!!!! Praise Jesus

WriterOnThe Storm:

That this country will probably never elect an atheist president is simply a fact of history: although, as you note, most of the founders were deists and not Christians, the country itself was nevertheless founded by religious “refugees” who were escaping the monolithic Church of England. Thus, there is a strong “mooring” in (primarily) Christian faith, whether it be Catholic, Protestant or otherwise.  Lamenting this will (perhaps sadly) not change history, nor the general demographic of the country.

As a related aside, the founders were not “decidedly against organized religion”; they simply did not want it tied into the political structure of the government.  They were most ardently in FAVOR of organized religion - as diverse as possible - since that was why the original settlers left England to begin with.

Finally, as I noted, one need not be an atheist to be a “good” president (or other elected official), and to make decisions based on fact, reality, reason, etc.  Most here accept that both JFK and Carter were able to do this, and there is no reason why another “Christian” president could not do so (though I admit that the current crop are too closely tied to one fundamentalist doctrine or another).  However, to suggest that a “faith-based” president cannot “face hard truths with courage and conviction” and “evince superior judgement despite profound and sweeping social currents to the contrary” is just as wrong as to suggest that an atheist president would lack the morality to make good decisions.

BruSays:

Well put.  Although I am a Christian and believe in the “Judeo-Christian construct” of faith, you are right to point out that Christianity is not the faith of everyone, and that, whatever one’s personal beliefs, if we are all to “get along” here on planet earth, it is critical that Christians really know and understand the faiths of others, where they came from, etc.  Bravo.

LOL:

That kind of comment is simply mean-spirited and non-constructive.  Mr. Wilhelm is entitled to his opinion and to post it here without fear of name-calling and denigration.

Peace.

I hope that john w wilhelm is close to 80 so that he will just go away and leave the world a better place for SANE people who are grounded in REALITY to figure out REAL SOLUTIONS to the world’s problems.

As an evangelical minister, I completely agree with the article, particularly its two central premises: (i) that Romney is trying to halve his cake and eat it two, and (ii) the “religious test” was only meant for government, and not for “the people.”

That said, a couple of comments to some on this thread.

There is an old saw that “Religion is about laws, regulations and behavior; Faith is about a relationship with God” (and, for Christians, with Christ).  Thus, it is true as the Buddhist here infers that too many faith-based people (including leaders) focus on “religion,” often to the exclusion of “faith.”  Certainly there is a place for religion (doctrine, etc.) within faith, but the latter MUST come first.

This is also why it is NOT true, as one poster says, that faith is per se the elimination or dismissal of reason.  There are many Christians (including evangelicals like myself) who believe: that the universe came into being ~13 billion years ago; that the earth is ~5 billion years old; that humankind evolved as a result of random mutation and natural selection (though we believe, as Darwin did, in “first cause”); that the deist (NOT Christian) founders of the country instituted a separation of church and state for the safety of BOTH, and that this separation MUST be strictly kept; that abortion is wrong, but that it is not up to the government to “legislate morality,” and thus women should have choice; that homosexuality is a sin, but that Jesus teaches that “he who is without sin, let him cast the first stone,” “take the log out of your own eye before you take the splinter out of another’s,” and “judge not, lest ye be judged in equal measure”; and that explanations of the “natural world” are the province of science (geology, physics, archeology, paleontology, etc.) and the scientific method.

The so-called Religious Right not only rejects most science, but takes Scripture out of context to support narrow, unloving, unforgiving and ultimately un-Christian positions.  Yet the basic precepts of Jesus’ ministry were love, peace, forgiveness, compassion, humility, patience, charity, service, selflessness, justice and truth.  In this regard, many Christians (sadly) would not know Jesus if He bit them on the ear.

Finally, I agree that faith/religion do NOT have a monopoly on morality; I know many athiests and agnostics who are more “Christian” than many self-proclaimed Christians.

Ultimately, faith/religion have their place in the public square.  This is both good and important.  And there is nothing wrong with an elected official, including the president, having their morality “informed” by their faith.  But as with JFK, Carter, etc., it is beyond critical (as more than one of you has said) that, since they are being made for ALL the people, political decisions be made based on facts and “reality on the ground,” not on faith.  And we should not vote for anyone who would do otherwise.

Peace.

But the bigger question is does he know right from wrong? Clinton did not seem to know that, and Bush sure as hell does not have a clue.

My only comment is I have been studing the Mormon faith for more than six months.  Each person of this church is just like thatr friend or family member that you know.  To judge someone for their religion is wrong.  I have friends from all faiths of the earth and I do not judge them so why do we use this when they are running for office.  We should use their past official performance and let that stand for them.  This is the problem with us in America today we are so worried that we are better than the next guy that we don’t let then show us what they actually have.  I am looking at each nominee for their past and present performance and not thier homelife, regilious preference, or if they smoke or not and that is the way the we should all look at them.  Good luck and God Bless to each candidate in your future.

But, when I die, if all of God’s word is TRUE, and I am in Heaven, then I have gained an Eternity of Pure Bliss, for only spending 80 years on my knees!  As the Bible describes Heaven, “Where there in no more aches and pains, no more tears, where you walk on streets of gold.  No shadow, no darkness, where the light never fails, no more hunger, no thirst”, If all I spend is 80 years on my knees, for an eternity of peace!  Then I am sold!  If I am a fool for God, who’s fool are you?!
As it says in the Bible, “What is it to gain the whole world, and yet to lose your own soul?”
The Bible, God’s Holy word, promises to protect the Christian. 
God’s love is this,“For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son”!  It also says, “That who so ever believes on the Son, shall have Eternal Life.”  Jesus himself said, “I am the way, the truth and the life, who so ever believeth on me shall have eternal life”,  So what is it that keeps you from getting on your knees and asking God to save you, and to accept you into heaven?  Is it pride, do you think God, will accept you on your own goodness?
It says in Ephesians chapter 2 verses 8 and 9"For by grace are ye saved through faith;and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
So since there is nothing any man or woman can do of themselves to get to heaven, why not get on your knees, just once in your life and ask God to forgive you of your sins, and accept what Jesus did for each and every one of us.  Ask Jesus to accept you just the way you are, and to come into your heart and save a sinner from hell.  He will save you from hell, just believe and it will be done.  You don’t have to go join a church, or put money into the church offering plate, all you have to do is accept what Jesus has done for you!  Thats it!  How hard is that?  If you don’t believe me, read your bible!  Never does it say anywhere that after being saved that you have to join ANY Church!!!  It is so simple, yet many people will miss Heaven, because they can’t believe it is that simple.

To understand what Mitt Romney has done for Massachusetts go to http://www.massresistance.org. Also google Boston’s Children’s Hospital Sex Change Clinic.

The idea that we could, as an electorate, seriously consider electing a person (any candidate who prefesses to be guided by or comforted by “faith in god,” (and that is, I believe just about every one of them) someone who chooses to act on the basis of fiction—-faith—-rather than fact (rational analysis based on careful appraisal of what is provable, as in “science”] tells me we are headed back into a new dark age.
  Faith is the wilfil rejection of fact—reason—in favor of dogma—-legends that oldtimers or snake oil salesmen or James Dobson or Osama says are true. For this we send our young off to war.
  Can we not hear, shreiking in their graves, the deists who launched the United States of America?
  The nation is being hijacked by bible-wielding lunatics. Worse, approximately half the electorate is happy about it. Sadly, I see no way to stop them.

To Louise:

I agree with your explanation of the idea that most mormons think they are republicans while they would make better democrats.  I have to point out though, being raised mormon myself, I don’t think that the vast majority of mormons think that they are republican, as you have assumed.

I appreciated your comments about your own observations of the mormon faith, very accurate.  Its natural to assume that any organization that encourages its members to live such a strict, and conservative code of conduct would be republican, but its just not as much the case withtin the mormon population.  There are far more democrats than one would think.

In fact, as an example, just this past year, dick cheney was booked to speak at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah.  But due to overwhelming protest and petition from students AND faculty, he was uninvited.

While I’m not a republican, and would not vote for Romney, I think that he has been trying to keep religion on the back burner to focus on REAL issues.  Its too bad though, that in order to gain ultimate favor within the republican party in effort to win the nomination, that he has to waste time trying to convince the religious right of his level of ‘christian-ness’. 

Perhaps the founding fathers might have been hoping that the people would follow their lead in leaving religion out of critical political decision making, like voting.  I wish they would too.

It seems as if Louise #120457 and Doug Chalmers#120457 both want to excuse Christianity as a supernatural experience or a hallucugenic near death experience often experienced in near death experiences, to this I say, WRONG!!!  You see guys, either you can have a personal experience, personal walk with GOD, or you can believe in the lies that Satan, the DEVIL wants or lets you to believe!  You see GOD does not force himself onto you, he gives you the choice to go the path thay you desire.  If you want to believe a lie, God will allow you to!  Once again he does not force himself onto you, he gives you free choice!  Either you can believe what he has done for you or you can believe a lie!  In the bible satan is referred to as the “Father of Lies”,  Man forces religion onto other men, per se the Catholic Church, Latter Day Saints (Mormons), Islam (the Quaran), Hindus, all of these religiions have killed people who did not believe as they do!
True Christians have died for their beliefs, who do you think the Romans fed to the Lions?  Who do you think Catholics killed during the Spanish Inquisition.  Get a clue, and get a real life, live with God, live for God, and have a life that shows Gods Love.  When you are saved, all of this will happen, you don’t go through some transformation, that is seen, or felt, but it happens through belief in God.  Be saved! Be Born again!  Accept Jesus Christ as your saviour and you will live for ever in heaven with God.  Choose not to make a choice, and yet you still have made the choice not to accept what God has done for you on the cross.  You will not go to heaven, you will go to Hell!!!  Plain and simple!

I get the feeling that most people who write into this site do not believe in God.  You know it really doesn’t matter.  You see, one day, we all die.  No one lives for ever.  If I am wrong, and the millions others who believe are wrong, about being saved.  We have nothing to lose, and nothing to gain. But, if what the Bible says is true, and we live forever in heaven and the rest of you who don’t believe in God, will burn forever in Hell!  You see, I am not promoting a religion, I am promoting what Jesus said, “You must be reborn!  and to be reborn you must believe in Jesus.  Confess your sins, to him!  Not some guy in a black suit!  Ask Jesus to come into your heart and he will!  You won’t feel anything supernatural, but at that moment when you do that, and you believe in Jesus, and trust that he will save you, you are transformed into a Son/Daughter of God!  I didn’t say it or write it!  But, it is written in Gods word, the Holy Bible, and I believe it!  When I die, if I am wrong for believing this, I will neither gain nor lose anything!  But if I am right, I will be in heaven!  When you die where do you want to be?