Can an Atheist be a Republican?
 

I have a dilemma. I am a life long, card carrying Atheist. But I also agree with the Republicans on economic issues most of the time. Democrats stand behind social programs, too much. They believe in stealing from the rich and giving to the poor. I do not. No hand outs here.

But as you know, many Republicans tend to be passionate, righteous, Christian Right parrots, who quote Rush Limbaugh or some other opinionated, narrow minded, big mouth. I live in an area where I fear to state my beliefs publicly.

Unfortunately, no other political parties count. So I stand behind the Republican party and hope that they do not force my children to pray in school or go on a witch hunt for the truly godless.

What to do......:D

<----- Atheist and a right winger squared to the tenth power!

I don't think anyone has suggested checking membership cards or asking questions about religious preference. The Republican party has iits share of loudmouths (I believe you mentioned Limbaugh) but for some reason Republican loudmouths tend to make more sense than do those of the Democrats (hope you caught the latest performance for the Hon. Robert C Byrd D. WV) If that doesn't win some kind of award for total phony the contest is rigged) and dont forget the Kennedys. Glad to have you in a Republican state of mind - and it doesnt hurt to be on the winning side occasionally.

With the next presidential election about 18 months away, many Americans today think President Bush will be re-elected to a second term and, in head-to-head matchups, Bush bests the top Democratic contenders.

In the latest FOX News nationwide poll of registered voters, conducted by Opinion Dynamics Corporation May 6-7, a majority (61 percent) predicts Bush will be re-elected, while 20 percent think he will be a one-term president.

Republicans are confident in their party leader retaining his office, as fully 85 percent think Bush will be re-elected compared to only 38 percent of Democrats. Independents fall in between with 57 percent thinking Bush will win in 2004.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,86357,00.html

It looks to me like your political views may be more inline with the libertarian party. Libertarians believe in a bare bones governent with little social programs, and no government enforced morality. They believe abortion marijuana, should be legal and religion should be free. Might want to check them out.

Or, you could just be an Independant.

I too have been a lifelong atheist and agree with the Republicans more than Democrats. But quite frankly, politics has little or nothing to do with religion and that's how it should be.

Though I supposed politicians can assist the religious group of choice. But that's not really the point.

Being an atheist Republican is like a black guy joining the Klan.

How do you figure that? Religion, for some people, has nothing to do with politics.

I am a republician christian and I believe that the first amendment holds true:
"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free excercise thereof;"

In other words, congress cannot pass a law that says you must worship a particular god, nor can they pass a law saying you can't worship at all.

Now to quote Frank Herbert (Author of Dune) "When religion and politics ride in the same cart, the whirlwind follows close behind."

half the things that bush is doing has stuff to do w/ religion.

he moral callings, and his moral duties and quoting from the bible in every speech he gives.

he's anti-abortion cuz of his religious beliefs, and he's anti other things cuz of this.


as somebody suggested, libertarian is the way to go.

i tend to go democrat cuz i'm pretty moderate on economic issues, but very left on social ones.

I think you mean Democratic Senator <b>Robert Byrd KKK</b> of West Virginia

Don’t forget, the Democrats are fine with a Klansmen as their spokesperson... "The Dean of the Congress"
he disgusts me.

I only go to church for funerals and weddings. Religion is not for me. But if helps other get through the day – fine they have that freedom.

I personally don't like Mr.Byrd, or the Democrats, for that matter. But I think some Republicans just use him as a scapegoat to cover up for their own policies toward African-Americans in this country. I know Democrats aren't perfect on this issue, but that's not the point.

Back to the topic, I can understand voting for a Republican if I liked him better than the Democrat challenger and no independent had a decent chance of winning. As far as joining the party, you should realize that a majority of Republicans are fundamentalist Christians who are actively trying to break down the wall between church and state while actively trying to promote their religion over others.

This statement by a prominent Republican says alot about how many Republicans view atheists like you and I:

"I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."
-Former President George Bush

if sr's views are that extreme, consider W 10x

I guess cause there are many religious groups that seem to lobby towards the Republicans, so as a result, you lose the whole "seperation of church and state" ideal with that party in a way. They're trying to reinstate school prayer, and everytime Bush talks he mentions "God" in every other line. I'm not even an atheist and it bothers me.

And apparently Mr. Mojo took my comparison the wrong way. Most Republicans are not fans of atheists. Klansmen are not fans of African-Americans. Allying yourself with a group that doesn't like you too much isn't the best political choice, in otherwords.

religion is anathema to me. is that negative enough for you?

my politics are conservative.

I decide what positions I support - not some political party.

you are conservative and the republicans are conservative.

both of you have different sources for being conservative, yours might be education, experience something like that.

but for majority of republicans, the conservative stance is a result of godly influence.

<b>Killer Yoda</b>
I understood your analogy,(a jew at a Nazis party or a Yankee fan at Fenway – also work)

I wanted to remind people of the Byrd=Klan connection…where’s the outrage?!
End of line…

<b> fredbowsnowski</b>
Both major political parties visit churches to garner support. How many times have we seen a Clinton in a Harlem church? Parties candidates go to churchs an pray with many different congregations – anything for a vote and money.

People also made a big deal about John F. Kennedy being Roman Catholic, and he was a democrat. He quoted God also, I don’t think he tried to convert anybody

Whenever Bush mentions something about God, I’ve tune it out. Because it means nothing to me. But I know that to many people, it means a lot.

We have “Freedom <i>of</i> religion” not “Freedom <i>from</i> religion”. The separation of church and state is still in effect – or are you saying that people can’t talk about their god whom ever it maybe? There’s no way Congress would pass a law that says we all have to Christian. Checks and balances work. If the president asks you to pray for the soldiers or Columbia astronauts, you don’t have to pray. He asks you, not tells you.

<b>The Dude</b>
<i>“but for majority of republicans, the conservative stance is a result of godly influence.”</i>

Please, just stop talking… If religion was all that mattered to people about political parties would 90% of blacks vote for Democrats? Don’t they both pray from the same book? Don’t they both go to church on Sundays?

For the <b>majority</b> of conservatives i know (and in my business i know lots) – its lower taxes, stronger foreign policy. If you join a party based on religion – then you really are a sheep.

<b> maximusveritas</b> for your bush quote include the date - August 27, 1987

you really think bush sr changed his views now?

I'm very conservative and there can't be anyone on the face of the planet that hates religion more than me. No god has ever had any influence on me and never will.

you're not part of the majority then.

congrats! :)

It seems funny to me then that religious organizations get tax exempt status, it's kind of like violating the constitution to me. Churches should have to pay taxes just like any other for profit business. (Church's are indeed businesses and they do operate for a profit, even if they operate under the guise of non-profit. How then would they have events and add on to the church?)
-On another note, it should be illegal for any politician to so much as mention or make reference to his or her religious beliefs because it should have no standing, and they use that as a means to get votes, which is a violation of the constitution.
- I am also an atheist republican, at least your not alone lol

Dude, I'm interested to know how you determined that the majority of conservatives arrived at their positions as a result of religion. That's not my experience at all. Not that I've seen data on it. I was wondering if you had.

Religion is a huge influence on a lot of lefties, too. The whole liberation theology thing, the influence of churches in the African-American community, the Anglican US governing body (I forget what it's called)........... it's not like there aren't very influential and very large religious blocks on the left side of the aisle that think their religion gives rise to their politics.

I just don't think religion per se is determinative of politics generally.

On the right: against homosexuality and abortion, for teaching of creationism and prayer in schools, insistence that "we're a Christian nation", and all manners of science denial from global warming to evolution.

On the left: a lot of black people go to church.... anything else? The American left is pretty consistent about the wall between church and state.

c'mon Will, there are a lot of very leftwing churches. If you want to talk about black ones, you can start with the one that our pres went to for twenty years. Riverside Church here in NY comes to mind immediately. Third world Anglicans (what we call Episcopalians in the US) wanted to break away because the mother church - archbishop of canterbury, and pretty much the whole hierarch of the american church - was doing things like recognizing gay priests.

And really, Will, the icon of the civil rights movement was a christian preacher. Fellow named King. I think you might have heard of him.

Like it or not, the fact is it's there. Religion is very influential in a certain segment of leftie thinking. You can't just dismiss it.

Of course there are left wing churches. What I don't see is religion sneaking into liberal politics. Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

I guess being an atheist myself, that's why I would prefer to describe myself as a Conservative than a Republican. I register and vote Republican, though, since there's only the two choices, realistically. I have many things in common with those who have faith, including an issue with abortion. But I don't consider my self fanatical about any particular topic. So I can disagree with some Republican beliefs and still share their conservatism.

My armchair, mostly uninformed take: Religion sneaks into liberal politics via an overemphasis on peace and compassion, but, lefty churches generally aren't big on proselytization so the religious aspect doesn't necessarily get that much public emphasis.

I don't see atheism & repbulicanism as necessarily opposed. I am agnostic (admittedly that is not atheism) and conservative. I have registered independent, but tend to vote for republicans.

I think Jefferson said it best: "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."

I've never heard of these leftist churches...

I have always wondered if it wasn't for the abortion issue if more religious people would side with the democrats since Jesus wanted people to live in peace, help your fellow man, live modestly (less materialistic), etc...

Jesus would be considered a communist by modern American conservative standards. I've read the Bible a good half dozen times now, and the character is throughly anti-establishment, anti-rich, anti-war, anti-death penalty (probably), and pro-social justice, pro-selflessness, pro-equality, and pro-social programs.

However, can you point to any passage (and I'm Catholic, so you've got an awful lot of leeway plus several more books I'll consider that most Protestants won't) in which Jesus tells his Disciples (or anyone else) to go out, take people's money from them by force, and use that money to pay for such things?

Jesus tells his Disciples to "feed my sheep" -personally-. He tells his followers to give out of their own abilities and their own treasure. Nowhere does he advocate, that I've ever seen, robbing one man to feed another or rebuild another's house.

Additionally, while He says bluntly that the wealthy have a difficult time entering the Kingdom Of God, He also makes it clear that this is because they are more tied to "this world," having built up treasure in it which binds them to it emotionally and spiritually. Nowhere does he say that being wealthy is inherently evil, or that the rich deserve to be punished. Joseph Of Aramathea, the man who donated his own personal tomb for Jesus's burial after the Crucifixion, was one of the wealthiest men in Roman Palestine at the time, wealthy enough to gain personal access to Pontius Pilate and his superiors. Something tells me that if Jesus was "anti-rich," as you put it, he wouldn't have had somebody like that hanging around except to throw unpleasant things at Him.

Folks like Sojourners and Unitarians primarily. Then to some extent, Lutherans and Episcopalians (my stepmother belongs to a liberal Episcopalian church) and even some Methodist and Catholic churches are socially liberal. Being a Christian and a conservative are not as exclusively tied together as the Christian right would like people to think.

christianity is a complicated phenomenon. lots of sides to it. the gospels have a pretty radical social message which various people have tried to turn down (see dunedan's post above for an example, one that pushes them away from social problems/class conflict etc. an makes everything all touchy-feely individualism) where others have done the opposite (most recently liberation theology, but that's really a new packaging on an old possibility)...christianity's been in bed with dominant political powers throughout it's history and at the same time it's provided alot of people the basis for mobilizing to change significantly (if not altogether) the nature and holders of political power.

so there's nothing to the bizarre-o claim from the us mainly evangelical protestant right that they and they alone are "real christians"...


and if you want to think about the relation of judeo-christian theology on "left" thinking, the notion of Revolution isn't really that different from any number of messianic ideas.

I don't think Jesus would be comfortable as a Republican.

I'm no expert on gospels or Christianity, but I tend to think people see in it what they bring to the table. Making pronouncements about what Jesus would or would not have liked about one American political party or another strikes me as somewhat frivolous. What would Aristotle have thought about open-source software? Roll that one around your head a bit and let me know if it makes much sense even to ask that question.

Jesus hung out with poor & destitute, prostitutes, lepers and infirmed. He also hung out with the tax man.

Based on that, I think he could be democrat or republican.

You're not quoting Jesus.

I never did trust Saul. Seems a bit unlikely that God appointed Hitler. Or Palin.

I thought of something similar when I saw the title of this thread pop up on my radar again. I was thinking how the world was completely different then. I felt a little weird with the post I made above. Especially considering the references in the above quote were originally about wealthy Romans paying tribute to Caesar.

I don't think Jesus would be comfortable as either a Republican or a Democrat. He'd probably be an anarchist and the powers that be would seek to punish him somehow.

Some things never change.

i have long figured that jesus wandering around the contemporary united states would have been met with an unfortunate accident long ago.

I always thought that David Foster Wallace was the second coming of Christ. It's tragic, really.