National Atheist Party Supports President Obama

As if they'd even consider voting for the theocracy party.

I'm a little perplexed by this. I have a lot of respect for atheists. I'm probably a lot closer to that way of thinking than to the anthropomorphic God idea that's so common, but...

Why would the National Atheist Party do this? It seems counterproductive, unless they're trying to get Romney elected. Problem is; we live in a fantasy land where most of the population was indoctrinated from early age into an irrational belief system about God. Even though there is absolutely no evidence (that's EVIDENCE) of even the existence of God, let alone a god that has human characteristics, needs desires, etc., they believe it, and sadly also believe that their other "Father" (ok well, maybe 3rd father) is the President (as benevolent father figure). A lot of these people will react to the idea that Atheists support Obama, by attaching "evil" to Obama because they believe that Atheism is anti-God (their version of God) and therefore satanic.

Sad, irrational, illogical, but true.

I agree with some of that, but think that they loved Bush, because, in spite of his cowardice, he would talk tough with words like "resolve" as he gave the steely eyed look into the camera. And "bring it on." They loved him because they were afraid after 9/11 and he manipulated and exploited that fear without them realizing it.

Robert

Not to forget his supersonic jet landing on the deck of an aircraft carrier dressed in complete militray garb, from helmet to boots. The pure essence of the John Wayne persona, {i.e.} in flys the hero of the hour.

I never understood why Americans didn't see the humor in that.

I think those inclined to see the atheists endorsement as a negative are already not voting for Obama.

"I think those inclined to see the atheists endorsement as a negative are already not voting for Obama."

I totally agree, Rory.

I disagree with Rory and Wil. I think there are a lot of "religious" people in the middle who are able to be influenced.

"I think there are a lot of "religious" people in the middle who are able to be influenced."

I understand that discrimination against atheists isn't limited to the religious right, but I don't get any sense that anti-atheist sentiment is so strongly held by a lot of people in the middle that they'd choose not to vote for a candidate just because of an endorsement from an atheist group.

The polling I've seen shows that Independents are most concerned about the economy, jobs and the deficit and are much less concerned about issues associated with the religious right (abortion, gay marriage, and birth control) than Republicans.

I think people in the middle are more likely to be influenced by economic, rather than religious, issues.

At first I was not sure whether this will be a good thing or a bad thing for President Obama. After some inner thought and reasoning, I tend to view the open support of the Atheist Party as being a potentially good thing for the Democrats. That is, if the DNC or Pres. Obama himself, (which I seriously doubt that he would) does not reject the offer of support for fear it would hurt the President more than help his campaign. Inasmuch, as there are more than 1 1/2 million voters in the United States who consider themselves to be Atheist, a number which is quite higher when one takes into acount that not all people feel free to express their disbelief in a God. The support of these people as well as the support of any other groups which come forward, should be just as acceptable as mine or your's. Afterall, the President of The United States of America, is suppose to represent all the people, not just those of a religious conviction.

Needless to say, Republicans in their political shrewdness will try to exploit the idea that if President Obama accepts the offer of support from the ANP, he is secretly an atheist. They will do so, in hopes that some Independent Christians who supported candidate Obama in 2008, will change their mind and vote Republican in 2012. However, I believe that for the most part, the vast majority of Independent Christian Americans, feel that all citizens regardless of religious or non religious affiliation are also Americans and have a Constitutional right to openly express their political opinions. As such, there should be no adverse response towards Pres. Obama graciously accepting the offered support.

The only religious sects which will view this as an opportunity to morally denigrate the President are those of the Christian Evangelical, Biblical Fundamentalist and Roman Catholic Religions. Those holding these religious beliefs were never going to vote for President Obama in the first place.

My error:

I should have stated that I was only referring to Democrat thinking when denoting the President's oath of office responsibility to all citizens.

It was thoughtless of me to not have taken into consideration the minset of the extremist conservative christian right, who want our country to be governed by a theocratic administration, which of course would exclude representing those of other or no faiths.

Scott, "It was thoughtless of me to not have taken into consideration the mindset of the extremist conservative christian right, who want our country to be governed by a theocratic administration, which of course would exclude representing those of other or no faiths."

Scott, if you're just saying that to try to irritate us ... fine. But if you're saying that because you think it is true, you are very deceived. We would take up arms against our own county to keep that from happening. We don't even let our own pastors 'TELL' us what to believe.
Liberal Christians sit under a pastor to learn what to believe. They seldom do their own research and discovery. Conservatives are much more independent, argumentative and hard headed :)
You can bet we're not letting any political leaders push us around.

Glome

You can bet we're not letting any political leaders push us around.



With one sentence you made my point better than I did in my whole comment. Most of the time, you people just deny the obvious. Many thanks !!!

Search til you find what you want RF. Don't let one group of people force you out. ... I know, you already know that. :)

I can understand why some atheists might be hesitant to vote for Obama (the increased funding to faith-based initiatives, the pandering, etc.) and some will prefer third party candidates (I know a few who are supporting Gary Johnson). But for those voters whose atheism will play a role in their decision, I'm not surprised that many will chose to vote for Obama. It's got to be hard to be an atheist Republican (yes, they exist!) these days.

I know at least 3 of them. One of the guys that was really nice person said he believed it was moral to kill your child up to 5 years old as long as it was done properly through specialist.
I think there a lots of them wil. Somehow it doesn't necessarily cause them to auto accept liberal political philosophy.

In a country with secular government, not believing in God shouldn't affect a person's political party affiliation any more than not believing in unicorns. Unfortunately, it seems that it doesn't quite work out that way.

And if the religious right continues to increase its influence over the Republican Party, I suspect the number of atheists (and non-Christians) in the Republican Party (or who at least tend to vote Republican) will drop.

After the Democratic National Convention it appears the National Athiest Party and the Democratic party are one and the same.

RF "Now, we've got a significant American Taliban that is hell bent on bringing back the KKK. They may not all know they're doing that, but they are."

I can't think why you would say that RF. What do you mean we may not know we're doing that. You're probably not with a lot of conservatives when they're alone. I honestly think there is very little bad feelings toward blacks. And the truth is, they wouldn't bring it up in a group of us because they would be shamed. Just because so many liberals say that's true doesn't mean it is.
True Christians never liked the KKK. We would have and currently would attack any white people hurting blacks. That really is the truth. I know from living on the inside :)

True Christians never liked the KKK.

What a totally unsupportable and less than knowledgeable statement. You most assurredly need to read the history of the KKK, inasmuch as you have demonstrated your ignorance of the Klans origin and continued existance.

In truth, both law enforcement officers and Christians were not only members of the KKK, but in many instances, they were leaders in the Klan heirarchy. That includes many Church elders as well as Ministers of faith and Police Commanders. In documented fact, the community leaders, (law enforcement, church and political) who were the Grand Dragons (Potentates) and all subcommanders, which ruled the individual Klans, not the local bad guys nor common people of the community.

It would be advisable to know the subject before posting a far less than knowledgeable comment thereon/thereto.

Scott, when you and I talk, our words mean different things. So it's a little hard to hear each other.

When you say Christians, you may be including anyone that says they are one, I don't know. I don't know who is exactly and who isn't, but I know Jesus said the church's would be filled with people that are not Christians. And I believe that.
That name doesn't mean much in general.

The KKK may well have been filled with church members. But, not real believers. I wouldn't think there would be any of them, but I also know even after we've accepted Christ we've done wrong things we'd like to hide our heads in a hole in the ground for so . . .
Anyway, I have everybody on both sides fairly mad at me from trying to get to be friends with both sides. So I'm thinking I'm not go to do anything except share short truths from the Bible from now on. You guys are being fairly warned :) Don't read my posts.

Glome

I have everybody on both sides fairly mad at me from trying to get to be friends with both sides.

No one ever attains that which he/she is seeking by playing both sides towards the middle, especially when debating political issues. Developing friendships is not the purpose behind the Gather News website, although it is possible to identify with a members who possess similar ideology. IMO, posting comments as a means of making friends would be decidedly disingenuous responses in a debate or discussion.

GN is an internet forum where articles are written on current events and issues. A forum where likeminded people discuss an issue and opposing ideologies clash in debative comments.

I sincerely do not see how you could possibly take both sides of a political issue, that is, unless you are a clone of, or closely related to, Mitt Romney, who's whole persona is disingenuous and therefore can be on all sides while smiling for the cameras and lying to the audience.

BTW & FTR: I am in no way mad at you, Hell, I don't even know you. I only oppose most of that which you post as being ideologically wrong in political reasoning.

Scott, "I sincerely do not see how you could possibly take both sides of a political issue,"
And
"I only oppose most of that which you post as being ideologically wrong in political reasoning."

I don't take both sides of an issue as your 2nd comment shows. I don't ever pretend or say less something I know to be untrue. I just try to have fun in spite of the fact that we don't agree. I guess it make me sound like a hypocrite. That's fine. I'm very tired of politics.
The truth is, it is because of Christ I don't like to cut people down (although I blow it and do sometimes.) He said "Love your enemies" :):)

I take it seriously. If you haven't chosen to get to know people and enjoy them, you'll never be able to talk to them about the Lord. He is my main purpose for anything I do since I've received Him.

If He loves you, I guess I can too :) But I won't argue with you anymore.

You're fine Scott, I don't take stuff personally usually, you did great. It's just not that fun anymore and never results in talk about the Lord.

Thanks for posting back.

Glome

If you haven't chosen to get to know people and enjoy them, you'll never be able to talk to them about the Lord.

Once again you are confusing a political forum with a way to teach and/or discuss religion to/with GN members.

Sincerely, that is not what the GN site/forum is for. That's the main problem with Christians, they expect all others to be interested in their religion, if I were, I would attend church services, which I do not.

I believe in Separation of Church and State !!!

Scott, our constitution is not against religion. It is only against letting any 'religion' (speaking of religion as a set of rules regarding living for God) run the country or give preference to those beliefs BECAUSE that's what some religion teaches.

Our Constitution is not against the existence of God.
It confirms His existence. It does not require others to believe in God. Beliefs regarding God's requirements are therefore not mentioned in the Constitution.

In fact, several lives were just lost due to free speech, hateful toward God and Religionists being honored here in USA. I approve of that freedom.

If I express my opinion on something like abortion, people respond to me directly from their life philosophy which includes their conclusions on whether or not there is a God. I understand that. The total of what you think about life is not only your life philosophy but includes your thoughts on whether or not there is a God. Maybe we should call it philianity :)
When I express a thought and am countered, just as you gave your reasons, I must back mine.

Abortion. It's wrong. ????? Why?

That question is going to require a comment on my philianity ... as well as yours. Or at least it will be reflected in the total answer. The first question we answer will probably reflect some of that.

Just as we learned not to discuss philianity with Muslims, we know it will also stir up bitterness and resentment in you guys, but the majority of you handle it pretty well.
COMPARED TO MUSLIMS :)

I would hate to have to debate the Islamic religion with every other post. :)

All this, just to state that Separation of Church and State all our thoughts and beliefs reflect strongly in our political beliefs And at that point, everyone and our varied molds of morality begins to show.