Is There a God?

[Alexamateo]

I must admit, when I see politicians going to church in the UK, it makes me uneasy.

I want my politicians to make decision based on reason, facts and logic, not some 'belief'. That scares me.

Conversely, I would see a politician with no faith as groundless and lacking a frame of reference. In other words, there would be no anchor points from which to make decisions from. Atheism just seems so nihilistic.

[BDunnell]

Conversely, I would see a politician with no faith as groundless and lacking a frame of reference. In other words, there would be no anchor points from which to make decisions from. Atheism just seems so nihilistic.

I'm afraid I consider your point of view quite offensive, personally. In no way do I consider my own atheism 'nihilistic'. What do you, with respect, know of the motivation behind my lack of religious belief?

And, quite honestly, how dare you suggest that the sense of judgement of someone who has made up their mind that there is no higher being must be rendered somehow inferior to that of any believer? I would rather people, including politicians, took decisions based on fact and reason rather than religious belief of any form. Your sense that religious belief makes an individual superior to a non-believer is not just patronising, but also groundless. In the context of politicians, how sad that you, and those like you, would ignore any good an atheist politician had ever done in favour of a spurious moral judgement in which their lack of religious beliefs overrides all other personal qualities they may have.

[janvanvurpa]

Conversely, I would see a politician with no faith as groundless and lacking a frame of reference. In other words, there would be no anchor points from which to make decisions from. Atheism just seems so nihilistic.

And therein is perfectly encapsulated the problems of religion in policy.

Some, because they have picked a few things to fixate on and who rationalise ignoring huge portions of their own sacred commandments, believe that they are superior and have superior judgement---in advance---because ultimately they believe their ONE WAY is the ONE WAY for all people, all questions...

While others who see their extremely selective concentration on just a few points in their Holy Book, while utterly ignoring direct commands from their Savior, believe those people to be cynical hypocrites at best, and dangerous and delusional people ready to do anything somebody might convince them is their Gods Will"

In short: "those that can make you believe in absurdities and concince you to commit atrocities".


You are a dangerous person Alex M. Your belief in a Zombie Jesus puts my liberty, my 2 little girls liberty and indeed the political process in this country in danger.

Why do you hate America?

[Rollo]

Conversely, I would see a politician with no faith as groundless and lacking a frame of reference. In other words, there would be no anchor points from which to make decisions from. Atheism just seems so nihilistic.

Adams, Franklin, Hamilton, Jefferson and Madison were probably all atheist.
Political Nihilism at least is based on the assumption that governments, the law and the enforcement of law, be done away with (and possibly replaced). It's funny that especially over the course of the primaries of late, we've seen supposedly Christian candidates, espouse and trumpeting policies which fit very very well within the philosophy of Political Nihilism. Yet in the case of Adams, Franklin, Hamilton, Jefferson and Madison, they wanted to build a "more perfect" system of government.
Currently we have a Prime Minister in Australia who is an openly declared Atheist. I wouldn't say that she's necessarily groundless and lacking a frame of reference either.

[BDunnell]

In other words, there would be no anchor points from which to make decisions from.

Another question. I do not go out and commit crime. Does this surprise you, given the lack of 'anchor points' I as an atheist supposedly have as regards decision-making?

[Tazio]

You're right Ben. In America, you're weird and unelectable if you're not religious. In the UK, the opposite is true.

Knockie that is not a belief held unilaterally. The west coast and other eastern urban areas are more than tolerant. Yes some of "my fellow Americans" understand that they are not promoting a candidate because of his religion or lack of it. We have a lot of citizens that are pro choice in this country and I bet a good proportion of those are non believers. It is true as you say though, given the entire demographics of the US, a belief in god is a requisite to getting elected President, or at least it has been until now.
Its freakin’ evangelists gone wild up in here

[Robinho]

Conversely, I would see a politician with no faith as groundless and lacking a frame of reference. In other words, there would be no anchor points from which to make decisions from. Atheism just seems so nihilistic.

i too am quite offended by the thought that because i lack religous belief i lack the grounding to make moral or other decisions. I don't need religon to tell me not to kill, steal, discriminate or how to treat people generally. general common decency is plenty of a grounding, relying on someone elses "anchor points" just seems to be refusing to take personal responsibility for your actions or decisions imo.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I don't agree. A religious education simply means that you've studied the doctrine of a particular religion. All that will allow you to do is consider the merits of one religion against another. As somebody pointed out earlier, there is a difference between religion and faith. To believe in god(s) you have to have faith. You don't have to follow a religion.

Personally, I don't believe in god(s) so I guess that makes me an atheist. The reason I don't believe in god(s) has nothing to do with religion but is rather a reflection of the fact that I simply don't need faith in a god to live my life.

I agree. One does not need to read Alice in Wonderland to know that it is not true.

Conversely, I would see a politician with no faith as groundless and lacking a frame of reference. In other words, there would be no anchor points from which to make decisions from. Atheism just seems so nihilistic.

No, just no.

What you are basically saying here is that you wouldn't like a politician who can think for himself/herself.

[Tazio]

Adams, Franklin, Hamilton, Jefferson and Madison were probably all atheist.

I have read similar historic assertions, and believe them to be true. I think the biggest misconception about our inalienable rights endowed by god, also referred to as "Natural Rights" is the intent of the meaning. I think the intent of these very determined men included these words with a full understanding that if there is not a god than there is no one left to deny them; i.e. all bases are covered

[BDunnell]

What you are basically saying here is that you wouldn't like a politician who can think for himself.

What also seems to be being said is that they would be perfectly happy with a radical Muslim politician, but not an atheist.