Chances for an Atheist President? - E.J. Dionne

[9N8X]

We have had athiest presidents before. Abraham lincoln,thomas jefferson, etc.

[phildirt3]

thats me and im in the minority he s nuts because people are fucking idiots

[hazydavey]

Chris Hitchens makes the point that several decades ago, you'd have been told you were crazy if you said that a divorced ex-actor would be President, much less a Republican President.

When the right man (or woman) comes along and wins people over, an atheist will be President.

But Dionne makes good points here - especially about how our separation of church & state is of great help to religion. Ironically, many religious people who rail against this separation don't see that.

[hawkertruffelsnout]

please don't call us religious

[jshjamaarify]

Wasington Post.

[ih8makinusernames]

I'd say 80 years optimistically. probably 150.

[jshjamaar]

16% This is false because Gall Up recently did one in 2010 and Atheism/Agnosticism is barely hitting 10%,

[Wordlaw12]

Yeah right, we will have an black female (Christian) president before we have an Atheist president. 200 years in the future or something, maybe.

[vGBoondock]

It's funny, because people think that if the Atheist president or a Christian president, the world would be peaceful. America doesn't control everything, though it may seem that way. Anyway though, there will never be peace, and there will always be debut. Horrible.

[Slacktoo]

hmm.. Wasington Post... never heard of it

[neema125]

lol he said "We did a pole"

At 0:29

[Bankertsaur123]

good job atheist :) more and more people are waking up

[MrAubery]

morons still think their vote matters

[crowtricolours]

Just a point on USA not having an established church --- the courts have granted one church in America rights not available to other religions - in that Scientology gets tax breaks not available to other religious groups --therefore, technically you could say Scientology is the USA established church with its preferencial treatment.

[hazydavey]

Two points.

1. It's possible that we have already had atheist Presidents even if they could not proclaim as much publically. Jefferson & Lincoln were probably not atheists but they were close.

2. Hitchens makes this point: If an exceptional political figure comes along who happens to be an atheist, he or she may well be elected. Why not? If before the 1970s, you said that America would elect a divorced 2nd rate Hollywood actor (and as a Republican), people would say you were crazy.

[TheDurtyDeed]

@wildboy789789 Well maybe he's more political than religious.

[wildboy789789]

@TheDurtyDeed obama is more politically intelligent than most republicans... republicans lost their non-belivers vote when bush claimed atheists wernt citizens... then they lost the gay vote by supporting a ban on homosexuallity... then they just lost the latinos when arizona started racial profileing... at least we can expect democrats to own the senate and congress this november, republicans are getting whats coming to them

[TheAspenTom]

@wildboy789789 Well, a fair-minded religious person would indeed recognize that there are many millions of non-believers in the US population --- and Obama is such a fair-minded religious person.

[wildboy789789]

@TheAspenTom true... some religious people are scientists... now i would never say this to their face because i respect them (but are they really religious if they dont kill people for working on saturdays, or fight the heritics like the bible says?)... id say these people are more agnostic (looking for an answer because we dont have one)... then again, i respect these people so if they wanna say "im on the jesus team" i wont question their belife

[SmilingJack100]

@wildboy789789 Because not all religious people are intolerant of people with other views. Just cause I'm jewish doesn't mean that I have to hate atheists.

[wildboy789789]

@SmilingJack100 but your wrong and we are correct... because you cant proove god, he doesnt exist

[MrAubery]

atheists are those who believe in NO God or gods. That is exactly what the antichrists of the bible are. Read 1st john 2:18-22 and 1st John 4:3. They will come into power where God's original temple is. This will be a very offensive thing. Just before the antichrist destroys the earth is when God will step in to show where not following God & denying God leads to. This is when He will prove himself to everyone. Then we will all be on the same page.

[MisterSelatcia]

"Read 1st john 2:18-22 and 1st John 4:3."

-Yeah, so what? Other religions say other things, why take yours over something else?

"This is when He will prove himself to everyone."

According to you. I happen to think otherwise. I'll just enjoy my life instead of worrying.

[fede2]

well, if it's in a book it must be true.

[SUPAHRL33TNINJA]

actually, an atheist is an individual who does not believe in a higher power. i am proud to be called Atheist

[sorgster]

@SUPAHRL33TNINJA join this group on facebook "I'm a proud athiest"

[thespadeinator]

@SUPAHRL33TNINJA me too :)

[bigbluefungus]

@SUPAHRL33TNINJA both you and i can't do exponential math then ;D

[slugworth28]

well get out there and vote for an atheist president.... you've got nothing to lose and more to gain...... right.................

[ReservoirdogEC]

An atheist president would have a hell of a time. They would pretty much have to run as a Democrat to have any shot at actually winning, and they would have to win without virtually all of the minority votes. You can't win an election with nothing but the college vote.

[mase5701]

Hopefully that college vote willl someday be the deciding constituency and we will se an atheist leading our country within the next 3 to 5 elections

And this first black president being progress, thats just society naturally becoming more ethnically mixed over time, it was bound to happen sooner or later. But an atheist president. Now thats progress!

[IbeeejayI]

The wasington post? Typo?

0:19

[john2000young]

I had escaped from Mao, and came to this country.

DON"T CREATE ANOTHER MAO PLEASE.

NO MORE ATHEIST LEADER IN THE WORLD. WHAT THEY KNOW IS ONLY KILL AND KILL AND KILL. THEY DON"T HATE YOU. THEY KILL YOU.

[thejonax]

speaking in all caps doesn't drive your point at all. it makes you look stupid.

[Aaberg123]

Moron. Get out more.

[gradyiscool]

The only thing he's wrong about is calling atheists a religious group.. We're not. We have no religion. That's the whole point of being atheist. That's the whole damn reason why we call ourselves atheist!! GAARR!!!.. sorry. .__.

[ArrogantAtheist]

Atheists FTW!!

[Cajaquarius]

It is likely so long as he doesn't constantly bring it up. Over 80% of Americans believe in an afterlife so if he is one of those athiests who think people who believe in God or have faith in something are stupid, he would do best to keep it to himself. Still, I don't think it is impossible, if he is smart, charismatic, and backed well.

[TheAndyLoraProgram]

If the world was Atheist or Agnostic we would all be at peace.

[Randomnormality]

Im still pretty certain we would find some reason to kill each other.

[TheAndyLoraProgram]

I agree but the number of killings would decrease rapidly.

[sapzap96]

There would be no suicide bombings and the deaths of innocents (or a smaller number).

[tomte47]

Religion spurs the built in group mentality of humans "us vs them" so it would probarly be bether without it but people would still find stupid reasons to kill each other. Before catolics and protestants fought each other because of differnt religions in Europe now they have given up religion and people fight each other because they are fans of different Soccer teams instead...

[Cajaquarius]

This is a pretty common idea with minoities of any kind. "If only all the white people were gone we would have peace" sounds similar to me. "If only there were only women in the world, there would be peace". At the end of the day, I disagree. But then, neither of us has proof because it is an untestable hypothesis to begin with so why argue about it, I suppose? Still, I am always leery of perfect world thinking, personally.

[birdman3631]

While I am atheist, I don't believe an atheistic world would be Utopian, while I do believe religion is quite divisive in modern day, hatred and suffering forms from a lot of sources, but it seems to me that the source of those sources, almost invariably, is greed and desires. Thus, I feel that a Buddhist world would be near perfection. Although I strive to follow Buddhist values, but the only reason I am not Buddhist is because I cannot believe the supernatural spiritual part.

[Fistfullofathiesm]

So what your saying is we should all not act like fucking pricks to each other?

[birdman3631]

That would be nice.

[SoftwareEngineer3]

Historically, Buddhist theocracy has been as horrible as any other. You haven't thought this through. Of course being atheist is not enough. Not believing in gods or ghosts or fairies, says little if any about your philosophy. There are secular philosophies that are far better than Buddhism, which as you say isnt so good at discerning fact from myth.

[birdman3631]

true, true. I probably wasn't clear, what i meant to say is that an atheist world isn't automatically perfect and that if everyone in the world were to set aside personal greed and so forth, things would be closer to ideal... however, in a practical sense, this is impossible.

[beancube2008]

I don't mind if it happen. Faith is not our only thought to live.

[argetfalcon]

most people say they wouldn't elect an atheist president. However if you go back to the 1960's people probably would also of said they wouldn't elect a divorced actor president either

[chainsawingdude]

Or even a Catholic president back in the early 1900s.

[argetfalcon]

very true or even black guy president

[lacej20]

I could be wrong, but whenever McCain or O'bama quote from scripture or evoke some form of God verbiage on the campaign trail it makes many Americans uncomfortable; I think it's a good start.

[fcsoccerlevi]

honestly

i think barrak obama might be an atheist or at least an agnostic. if u hav read any of his books you could see where i am coming from

[argetfalcon]

i agree

[neotoy]

If you notice, because of technology society is changing in subtle yet extreme ways. Each year that goes by religion looses relevance because of these changes. The past and the present can only relate for so long. Religion remains static while reality is always moving.

[RationalLiberty]

im an atheist, and i hope the majority of ppl will soon be secular.

I think one of the reasons america is so religious is they have not had a similar experience as Europe did in the Wars of Religion.

I think as well the U.S. is so militaristic because they have never been attacked on their soil by anyone like France was twice. They have never experienced the horror of religious wars or world wars.

[mikezephyr]

but then again the force for secularism and enlightenment was religiosity. although, since america is a settler society (that encapsulates late 18th century england)- it is based upon classic liberalism- republicanism, laicite, bourgeois socioeconomics- the reaction and fuedalism and state religion as in europe that led to secualarity wasn't here.

[lee11991964]

RationalLiberty, I agree with most of your post, but to say that the US hasn't experienced "world war" is a bit of a stretch, they did lose 100s of thousands of men in both world wars.

[RationalLiberty]

but it wasnt anything near the amount france, russia, germany and to a lesser extent Great Britian experienced during the war. These countries lost millions during both wars.

I hope you see my point though.

[lee11991964]

Yeah you are right in terms of losses, what I always find almost unbelievable is the Soviet losses in WW2, us, the Brits lost about 300,000 military deaths, the French lost 340,000 military and 470,000 civilian deaths, the Germans lost 3,250,000 military and 3,810,000 civilian deaths. The Soviet losses were 8,668,000 military and 17,100,000 civilian deaths amounting to over 26 million, that's equivalent to battle of the Somme losses, 60,000, for each and every day of the war, truly staggering.