Separation Church & State in Office

[LightbulbSun]

Are you guys who are arguing over the definition of athiest familar with the concepts of "weak" and "strong" athiesm? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_and_strong_atheism

Several parts of the article are relevant to the thread: and regarding Dawkins:

Well aware of it, and I find it to be word-splitting.

 

[LightbulbSun]

I read the site, or most of it anyway, and it appears genuine to me. Can you show me where you found that it is satire and not real? Because I've not found anything stating so.

It's an internet church designed to hand out minister certificates. It's to show how easy it is to become a minister.

By the way I am not religious and by your definition you might even consider me an atheist. I consider myself agnostic.

Everyone is an atheist, but to varying degrees. The only difference between me and a Christian is that I don't believe in their God.

The point (to me) is that atheism, to some of us, is a belief system that is just as prone to the preference or prejudice found in other belief systems.

I'm still waiting to see this system I'm suppose to be following.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

It's an internet church designed to hand out minister certificates. It's to show how easy it is to become a minister.

I believe that if you read their "church's" mission statement they state that it is to allow atheists (or atheist organizations) the rights and options traditionally reserved for theists.
Again my point is that it is apparently an organization officially and legally recognized by the government as a "Church" and possesses the same rights. Posted in response to...

Does that mean we can get tax free status for spoiling children's beliefs at the mall at Christmas time? Awesome!

Everyone is an atheist, but to varying degrees. The only difference between me and a Christian is that I don't believe in their God.

This seems like rediculous semantic manuevering to me. "Christians are atheists because they don't believe in other people's gods"
But I'll agree to quit nit picking definitions.

I'm still waiting to see this system I'm suppose to be following.

I'll continue with the ending of the endless argument by returning to my point.
Atheists, due to their belief system (or lack there of), would most probably be more inclined to side with legislation and dispersal of funds with a preference towards non-religious organizations. Perhaps even decide with prejudice in matters regarding laws, regulations, and court decisions against religious establishments. In short, having only atheists in government does not adequately represent the interests of all citizens and may in some fashion work against those interests. Whether you consider atheism a belief system or not.

 

[LightbulbSun]

This seems like rediculous semantic manuevering to me. "Christians are atheists because they don't believe in other people's gods"
But I'll agree to quit nit picking definitions.

Well that's what atheism means. It simply means "a lack of belief in a god or many gods." There are many gods that Christians have a lack of belief in, therefore making them atheists, but to a certain degree. The term becomes more lucid when you point this out to people.

I'll continue with the ending of the endless argument by returning to my point.
Atheists, due to their belief system (or lack there of), would most probably be more inclined to side with legislation and dispersal of funds with a preference towards non-religious organizations. Perhaps even decide with prejudice in matters regarding laws, regulations, and court decisions against religious establishments. In short, having only atheists in government does not adequately represent the interests of all citizens and may in some fashion work against those interests. Whether you consider atheism a belief system or not.

I would agree that full blown atheists would be more inclined to side with legislation towards non-religious organizations since what would be the rationale behind them supporting a religious organization? That would be a perfect case of cognitive dissonance.

 

[mheslep]

He was pretty darn close to being one, especially for his time. (He was often called an "infidel" for his views.) http://nobeliefs.com/jefferson.htm"...

No, Jefferson was not an atheist, period. He was 'pretty darn' unique in his views, probably closest to a Deist.
From the quote list provided:

I can never join Calvin in addressing his god. He was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be

 

[Doc Al]

He was 'pretty darn' unique in his views, probably closest to a Deist.

Right! The next best thing to being an atheist.

 

[gabrielh]

Certainly an atheist should be able to be elected, but any other person who has a secular approach to policy, regardless of their religious stance should also have that opportunity.

 

[OmCheeto]

I've been thinking about this for a couple of days.

I tried to imagine what it would be like today if we had had no theology, ever.

The words kept flowing through my head. What would we have used instead?
Would we just have used different origins?

holiday? Hollytreeday?
good bye? May a goat be with you?

And what on Earth would we have called fudge divinity? fudge-wow?



----------------------------------------------------

might be a good topic for a new thread.
and still no yin yang smileys... who do I have to bribe?

 

[jonefre]

just a question... how is the 'separation of church and state' even an issue? is it in the constitution? I thought that it was only said in a speech by Thomas Jefferson... so y does it have any relevance what so ever?

 

[russ_watters]

just a question... how is the 'separation of church and state' even an issue? is it in the constitution? I thought that it was only said in a speech by Thomas Jefferson... so y does it have any relevance what so ever?

It's an explanation/slogan TJ used to explain the need for the establishment clause of the 1st Amendment.

 

[Astronuc]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

The concept or principle of 'separation of church and state' came later through various court (particular Supreme Court) cases, and represents an interpretation.

See discussions - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights#Amendments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Establishment_Clause_of_the_First_Amendment

We also have - Article 6 of the US Constitution.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Six_of_the_United_States_Constitution
http://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm#a6

http://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm

 

[mplayer]

Central Atheist Dogma in my opinion:
Given the current state of knowledge, there is a low probability of deities existing.

Which I don't think is really a dogma at all, so maybe it's meaningless.

I heard somewhere that comparing atheism to a religion is like calling bald a hair color. Although I guess when you get technical about it atheism can mean many things to many people.

As far as only atheists being able to hold office, I voted no, it shouldn’t really matter what your beliefs/disbeliefs/non-beliefs are, as long as you are legislating with the real world in mind. Ideally, of course. This does not seem to be the case with American politics at present though. I don’t think I could get elected as anything if I admitted to being an atheist. On the other hand, my chances of winning an election would markedly increase if instead I ran as a Christian, even if my policies were exactly the same, and that is especially the case in certain areas of the country, which I happen to live in. I definitely think that is a problem. I would also be interested to see the results of a similar poll that said something along the lines of “Only allow theists and/or Christians to hold office?” and see how many theists would vote No.