NationStates Jolt Archive

Yestoday I made a poll called "Hypothetical US Presidential Election & Christianity" (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=494270) in an effort to find out how important Christianity & atheism is for a presidential candidate in the US.

Though I think it was (and is) an interesting poll, I'm under the impression that a poll purely about personal bias for or against christianity & atheism, is too hypothetical for most people. It didn't occur to me when I made the poll, unfortunately, but I strongly suspect it doesn't actually reveal anything about how NSGers feel. So I'll try to create a revised poll that gives everyone the opportunity to voice their opinion (or lack there of).

Here's the New and Improved™ poll scenario:

All of you NSGers now have the opportunity to decide which candidate from your party will run in the presidential elections, and your decision's now down to their stance on religion.

Candidate A is a devout Christian, and this does affect his/her policies.
Candidate B is a devout Christian, but this does not affect his/her policies.
Candidate C is a devout Muslim, and this does affect his/her policies.
Candidate D is a devout Muslim, but this does not affect his/her policies.
Candidate E is an avowed atheist, and this does affect his/her policies.
Candidate F is an avowed atheist, but this does not affect his/her policies.

You can also Abstain, or vote for Myrth, Pancakes & Waffles.

EDIT: The reason this is a public poll, is because I didn't realise I could have made it multiple choice & asked you to specify whether you're American or not. It's a raw deal being daft.

Also, the poll is about which of these candidates from your own party you wish to run for president. That means if one is a right wing libertarian, the others are as well (though perhaps to a greater or lesser extent).

I really can't answer this question. It depends on what exactly their beliefs are, and how they affect their policies.

A left-wing religious Christian who was in favor of equal rights regardless of sexual orientation would definitely get my vote before a right-libertarian atheist whose politics were based on the avoidance of "imposing morality," even if the Christian candidate's religion was a very strong influence on her politics (say, an advocate of Liberation Theology.) On the other hand, the current crop of right-wing Christian fundamentalists tends to get me to favor those who leave their religion out of their politics.

Myrth, Pancakes, and Waffles appear infinitely more interesting to me.

hmmm, this is tough for me to decide. On one hand, presidents shouldn't try to force their beliefs into the government. On the other hand, religions teach good morals and I think a religious president would more often make right choices. So I would like to see a moral, somewhat religious president that doesn't try to make his beliefs policy. Good luck on that one, huh?

As for a christian or a muslim? I don't think it really matters if you don't try to make your beliefs policy. Both religions pretty much teach the same thing: Be nice to people, don't do bad things, etc. etc.

Being christian myself however, I'll probably go with Candidate B.

hmmm, this is tough for me to decide. On one hand, presidents shouldn't try to force their beliefs into the government. On the other hand, religions teach good morals and I think a religious president would more often make right choices. So I would like to see a moral, somewhat religious president that doesn't try to make his beliefs policy. Good luck on that one, huh?

As for a christian or a muslim? I don't think it really matters if you don't try to make your beliefs policy. Both religions pretty much teach the same thing: Be nice to people, don't do bad things, etc. etc.

Being christian myself however, I'll probably go with Candidate B.And for the exact same reasons, I'd pick candidate F. In other words; I believe religion (generally speaking, but the Abrahamic ones in particular) to be inherently amoral & I believe the prequisite for superstitious beliefs to be the ability to abandon rational thought. As such, I have a hard time trusting the judgement of religious people.

I wouldn't care about there religion really its what they promise to do that buys my vote

of course that’s not the question so I would say candidate D because it would help Britain look like the multicultural nation it claims to be (though there should be a Buddhist option)

A or B.

Possibly an agnostic person. Let's call him the F-option.

Others need not even apply.

Damit I voted the wrong one! Meant to vote for F. Ah well

If a religious candidate's religion doesn't affect their policies, then I don't care. They could worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster and it wouldn't make a difference. I'd probably be more inclined to vote for someone who worshipped the FSM though, shows they have a sense of humour.
Having said that, being an atheist I'd be happy to vote for the atheist whose policies are influenced by atheism. Any of B, D, E or F is fine for me.

Yestoday I made a poll called "Hypothetical US Presidential Election & Christianity" (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=494270) in an effort to find out how important Christianity & atheism is for a presidential candidate in the US.

Though I think it was (and is) an interesting poll, I'm under the impression that a poll purely about personal bias for or against christianity & atheism, is too hypothetical for most people. It didn't occur to me when I made the poll, unfortunately, but I strongly suspect it doesn't actually reveal anything about how NSGers feel. So I'll try to create a revised poll that gives everyone the opportunity to voice their opinion (or lack there of).

Here's the New and Improved™ poll scenario:

All of you NSGers now have the opportunity to decide which candidate from your party will run in the presidential elections, and your decision's now down to their stance on religion.

Candidate A is a devout Christian, and this does affect his/her policies.
Candidate B is a devout Christian, but this does not affect his/her policies.
Candidate C is a devout Muslim, and this does affect his/her policies.
Candidate D is a devout Muslim, but this does not affect his/her policies.
Candidate E is an avowed atheist, and this does affect his/her policies.
Candidate F is an avowed atheist, but this does not affect his/her policies.

You can also Abstain, or vote for Myrth, Pancakes & Waffles.

EDIT: The reason this is a public poll, is because I didn't realise I could have made it multiple choice & asked you to specify whether you're American or not. It's a raw deal being daft.

Also, the poll is about which of these candidates from your own party you wish to run for president. That means if one is a right wing libertarian, the others are as well (though perhaps to a greater or lesser extent).

I wouldn't vote for any of the guys who let their religious believes (or disbelieves) influence their politics. Other than that, I don't care if they're Chrisitan, Muslim or Krishna.

But then again, I'm no US citizen.

I wouldn't vote for any of the guys who let their religious believes (or disbelieves) influence their politics. Other than that, I don't care if they're Chrisitan, Muslim or Krishna.

But then again, I'm no US citizen.


How on earth can you not have your beliefs and philosophies influence your acts?

I think I pick E.

How on earth can you not have your beliefs and philosophies influence your acts?
For instance, while I may be an Atheist I still generally consider it poor form to nail "God Is Dead" plaques up in every house of worship.

An athiest, is not going to make any smears on the line between Church and State.
This is an issue wich has been almost ignored, for about 7 years now.

An athiest candidate will not push for writing discrimination into the Constitution, and making same sex marriages illegal, or at least not base such a decision on religious laws wich do not apply to everyone equally.

The same candidate would not likely seek to overturn Roe V Wade, based on the same intolerant religious laws, and not base his own moral plilosophy on the whole of what a very old ambiguous text infers.

The most solid arguement for such a candidate, wouldnt be what he WOULD do, but rather, what he would not.

B, D, E, or F. The rest need not apply.