What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Meet the atheist who quizzes presidential candidates about their faith (1 Viewer)

Chadstroma

Footballguy
Meet the atheist who quizzes presidential candidates about their faith


As presidential candidates spent weeks in Iowa, many of them let their religious flags fly high. Donald Trump brought out the Bible his mother gave him. Marco Rubio and Hillary Clinton both spoke about their faith. Even Bernie Sanders, who doesn’t participate in organized religion, spoke up about his personal beliefs.

One voter wondered where all this God talk left Americans who were not religious. What about atheists and other nonbelievers? So he decided to ask the candidates.

Justin Scott, a self-employed photographer and Iowa native, spoke to every major presidential contender and more than a few of the minor ones. At pizza parlors and coffee shops, meetups and rallies, Scott asked the candidates about atheists. He asked them if they support the separation of church and state and why an atheist voter should vote for them.

Political observers parsed the answers, speculating on how they would play with various religious voters. But what about atheists?

I spoke on the phone to Scott, who lives in Waterloo, Iowa, a few hours before the caucuses began on Monday. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Why did you want to talk to the presidential candidates about the separation of church and state and atheist voters?

I went into this as an atheist activist, as a secular activist, as somebody who wants to know where candidates stand on separation of church and state.

Two years ago, I came to the realization that I am an atheist. I am completely comfortable saying I am an atheist and I felt a longing to make some kind of positive impact, whether that’s spreading the word about atheism or letting people know that I am an atheist.

I feel like just saying, “Hi. I’m an atheist” really tears down walls. A lot of people know who I am in Eastern Iowa, so it’s going to tear down the idea that you can’t be good without God.

I’m all for you having your beliefs. Go to church. Wear your cross necklace. Bring your Bible to school. I don’t care. But when I have elected officials trying to influence my life and my family’s life based on their religious beliefs and traditions and preferences, I have a huge problem with that.
What did it feel like to ask your question?

As an atheist voter, going in to some of these, you realize you’re going to be surrounded by people who disagree with you. I really felt that with Ted Cruz.

He had an event at a small coffee shop. It feels like, everyone believes in God and it’s the Christian God. The people talking ahead of Cruz, they’re going on these pro-God, pro-gun, anti-Obama rants to get the crowd into a frenzy. People are so excited. It’s like a rock concert.

Then they welcome Ted Cruz, the savior, this Christian savior, and then he gets the crowd even more riled up. It was like injecting Christian steroids into these voters. The place was just worked up.

I put my hand as high as I could reach. I said, “Mr. Cruz, I have a question for you.” I said, “Hi. I’m an atheist.”

The room went silent. It was fun!

Who did you feel answered the question best?

With Bernie Sanders, I could sense this was not a talking point. He basically said the Founding Fathers wanted there to be separation of church and state: That’s how they set this thing up. We have seen other governments mix the two, and we have seen what has happened out of that, and we don’t need that in our country.

Hillary Clinton gave a very good answer as well. The thing that I really appreciated about Hillary wasn’t so much her answer, but that she took the time and she engaged. I had a T-shirt on that said “Atheist Voter.” She had every reason to ignore me. She had every reason to keep taking selfies with voters. I said, “Secretary Clinton, I have a question for you about religious freedom in this country.” She stopped. She said, “Go ahead.” She said she supported separation of church and state.

What about the Republicans?

Donald Trump and Rand Paul both blatantly ignored my question. Would not answer it. Would not acknowledge me. Would not give me the time of day.

The very devout Christian candidates, Marco Rubio, Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee, took part in a dialogue. There was a genuine conversation.

I seriously felt like I could sit down with Marco Rubio and ask him, “Hey, what about this policy? What about that policy?”

My question was provocative. I asked him if he was running for commander in chief or pastor in chief. But after it was all over, I went up to him, I shook his hand. He thanked me for my question. I thanked him for his answer. We took a selfie together.

Santorum, Rubio and Huckabee — and Jeb Bush as well — were people I could really talk to. Jeb Bush was probably the Republican, out of all of them, that I could appreciate. He didn’t try to take a shot at me or my disbelief. Jeb Bush just gave me a very solid, non-preaching answer about how a Catholic and atheist could come together. He didn’t take that little dig at me.

John Kasich, he made a comment about, “Well, don’t give up on your Bible. Keep reading the Bible.” I really have a problem with that.

One reason religious groups can be politically powerful is because they’re organized. Do you see potential for the organization of a secularist voting bloc?

I’m having internal battles in my head. I want to see all the differently labeled nonbeliever groups come together. We all support this idea of keeping our government secular. We all are part of this movement that doesn’t want to have laws that are dictated by someone else’s religious belief.

We want to have a way of life that’s free from discrimination and oppression based on religious beliefs. If we found out that a law was going to discriminate against an entire group of people, we’d be mad enough. But if we found out that law was based in someone’s religious belief, that would cause all of us to slam on the brakes. We could all get involved in that.

I think these issues are really big now: religion in government, religion in public education, religion’s attempt to control reproductive rights. Even if you are a very conservative atheist, you could stand for small government and limited government power, and still say if you’re against abortion simply because your holy book says that, and I have a problem with that.

A lot of voters — even some who aren’t very religious themselves — use the authenticity of a candidate’s religious commitments to judge character. How do you think candidates should be evaluated?

Mike Huckabee told me he’d rather vote for a genuine atheist than a Christian candidate who talks the talk but doesn’t walk the walk. I was pretty happy with that answer.

I don’t care how deep of a believer you say you are. What I want to know is that when push comes to shove, are you using superstition and a book that was written 2,000 years ago as your guide or are you using an evidence-based approach?

I would weigh out specific issues based on, does this limit somebody’s freedom? Does this decision promote, advance or limit my freedom?

There are a lot of different ways that religious beliefs can inform or shape politics, though. If someone like Hillary Clinton supports a policy that you do and she gives a religious reason for that, does that matter to you?

Hillary Clinton has come out and been very vocal about her beliefs: “God bless Iowa” and that sort of thing.

I find it slightly annoying.

It’s tough. I don’t want to talk out of both sides of my mouth here. I’m always going to side with science and evidence. I’m pro-choice, and if Hillary were to say she’s pro-choice because God told her, part of me would have a problem with that.

At the end of the day, I would look at what is the outcome, and I would weigh out the evidence. So maybe whether or not the inspiration comes from religion doesn’t matter.



Do you think it would be possible in the foreseeable future for an open atheist to be elected president?

For a while, we didn’t think we could have an African American president. And look what happened.

I’d really like to see a secular Supreme Court justice. How amazing would it be when they are sitting there talking about where do rights come from to have someone in there saying, “Rights come from humanity and rights come from human beings and society”? It’s exciting to even think about.

I think it would just be exciting to see, in a future election cycle, just to see one of these candidates pander to the atheist vote. How funny would that be to tune in to the 24/7 news cycle and hear, “Is candidate XYZ doing enough to win the atheist vote?” That would be great.

Daniel Silliman is an instructor of American religion and culture for the Heidelberg Center for American Studies at Heidelberg University. He is an associate editor of “Religion and the Marketplace in the United States” and you can follow him on Twitter @danielsilliman.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/02/02/meet-the-atheist-who-quizzes-presidential-candidates-about-their-faith/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na

 
I think it would just be exciting to see, in a future election cycle, just to see one of these candidates pander to the atheist vote. How funny would that be to tune in to the 24/7 news cycle and hear, “Is candidate XYZ doing enough to win the atheist vote?” That would be great.
Loved this line. We are likely still at least a generation away or so.

 
Officer Pete Malloy said:
:goodposting:

I'd be willing to bet that Sanders and Clinton are both atheists. Probably Trump too.
Sanders has certainly copped to being irreligious. He's all but called himself a secularist. It's frankly a little amazing to me that more hasn't been made of it because he's making absolutely no attempt to show himself as a man of faith.

 
Officer Pete Malloy said:
:goodposting:

I'd be willing to bet that Sanders and Clinton are both atheists. Probably Trump too.
Sanders has certainly copped to being irreligious. He's all but called himself a secularist. It's frankly a little amazing to me that more hasn't been made of it because he's making absolutely no attempt to show himself as a man of faith.
Thank god.

Trump's pathetic pandering to the religious crowd is, like, the 17th most vile and disgusting trait he's displayed thus far.

 
Officer Pete Malloy said:
:goodposting:

I'd be willing to bet that Sanders and Clinton are both atheists. Probably Trump too.
Sanders has certainly copped to being irreligious. He's all but called himself a secularist. It's frankly a little amazing to me that more hasn't been made of it because he's making absolutely no attempt to show himself as a man of faith.
If he actually gets the general it will be an issue among many issues. In the Democratic primary there is nothing to gain from trying to discuss his faith/lack thereof or whatever else because it wouldn't swing votes at all.

 
Officer Pete Malloy said:
:goodposting:

I'd be willing to bet that Sanders and Clinton are both atheists. Probably Trump too.
Sanders has certainly copped to being irreligious. He's all but called himself a secularist. It's frankly a little amazing to me that more hasn't been made of it because he's making absolutely no attempt to show himself as a man of faith.
Thank god.

Trump's pathetic pandering to the religious crowd is, like, the 17th most vile and disgusting trait he's displayed thus far.
Trump is so transparent that I'm far more amused than upset. The fact that he's done pretty well with evangelicals is just hilarious to me.

 
Officer Pete Malloy said:
:goodposting:

I'd be willing to bet that Sanders and Clinton are both atheists. Probably Trump too.
Sanders has certainly copped to being irreligious. He's all but called himself a secularist. It's frankly a little amazing to me that more hasn't been made of it because he's making absolutely no attempt to show himself as a man of faith.
If he actually gets the general it will be an issue among many issues. In the Democratic primary there is nothing to gain from trying to discuss his faith/lack thereof or whatever else because it wouldn't swing votes at all.
When the Pew polls come out, Democrats distrust atheists too. It's likely hurting him with minorities.

And he has discussed it. He's said he isn't religious. He's said he belongs to no organized religion. And he's said that whatever "spiritual" beliefs he has stems from his belief that we are all connected to each other as humans and have attendant obligations to one another. That's pretty much the secular humanist credo.

 
Officer Pete Malloy said:
:goodposting:

I'd be willing to bet that Sanders and Clinton are both atheists. Probably Trump too.
Sanders has certainly copped to being irreligious. He's all but called himself a secularist. It's frankly a little amazing to me that more hasn't been made of it because he's making absolutely no attempt to show himself as a man of faith.
Thank god.

Trump's pathetic pandering to the religious crowd is, like, the 17th most vile and disgusting trait he's displayed thus far.
Trump is so transparent that I'm far more amused than upset. The fact that he's done pretty well with evangelicals is just hilarious to me.
Well, to be fair, the evangelicals aren't exactly playing with Stephen Hawking's IQ and their belief system was compromised long ago. Trump should just hire some of his casino magicians to make it look like he can fly during his next presser. Full Monty, I say, Donald.

 
Officer Pete Malloy said:
:goodposting:

I'd be willing to bet that Sanders and Clinton are both atheists. Probably Trump too.
Sanders has certainly copped to being irreligious. He's all but called himself a secularist. It's frankly a little amazing to me that more hasn't been made of it because he's making absolutely no attempt to show himself as a man of faith.
If he actually gets the general it will be an issue among many issues. In the Democratic primary there is nothing to gain from trying to discuss his faith/lack thereof or whatever else because it wouldn't swing votes at all.
When the Pew polls come out, Democrats distrust atheists too. It's likely hurting him with minorities.

And he has discussed it. He's said he isn't religious. He's said he belongs to no organized religion. And he's said that whatever "spiritual" beliefs he has stems from his belief that we are all connected to each other as humans and have attendant obligations to one another. That's pretty much the secular humanist credo.
It would be a HUGE mistake for the Clinton campaign to make his lack of faith a campaign issue. Huge.

 
Officer Pete Malloy said:
:goodposting:

I'd be willing to bet that Sanders and Clinton are both atheists. Probably Trump too.
I could see Clinton having somewhat of a faith. Of course it's impossible to tell when she's being sincere about anything so who the hell knows.I don't believe in Satan or anything but if you told me Trump was the human incarnation of the demon Belial, who ensnares the righteous with his three sins of fornication, riches and the profanation of the temple, I'd be like, okay, makes sense.

 
If Sanders had been raised christian, it would probably be easier to attack his secularism. But attacking a guy for not being sufficiently faithful to a religion that you yourself do not believe in just seems... well, weird at best, and borderline antisemetic at worst.

 
I have a huge problem with that.
I really have a problem with that.

and I have a problem with that.

part of me would have a problem with that.
We get it... you're a whiny BLOUSE and you want to make sure everybody knows.

 
I have a huge problem with that.
I really have a problem with that.

and I have a problem with that.

part of me would have a problem with that.
We get it... you're a whiny BLOUSE and you want to make sure everybody knows.
Yea, the thing I found humorous about it is how badly he wanted to look or maybe even authentically be in the 'live your life and I live my life and it doesn't really matter what you believe' but he just could not help himself.

 
Welp, Kasich just lost my vote.
Were you surprised by his answer?
I dunno, I guess I hoped Kasich would say something a little more tolerant than "Don't give up on your Bible!"Actually I liked Huckabee's answer, even if I think he was being a bit disingenuous.
Why is it 'intolerant' to say "Don't give up on your Bible" (even if I am not a fan of that answer- I think this is a fair question)

What about Huckabee's answer makes you think it was disingenuous? Or rather, what makes you think that?

 
Welp, Kasich just lost my vote.
Were you surprised by his answer?
I dunno, I guess I hoped Kasich would say something a little more tolerant than "Don't give up on your Bible!"Actually I liked Huckabee's answer, even if I think he was being a bit disingenuous.
Why is it 'intolerant' to say "Don't give up on your Bible" (even if I am not a fan of that answer- I think this is a fair question)
I don't think that tolerance and proselytizing are compatible with each other. Saying "Don't give up on your Bible" is just a variation on "You need to convert to my religion". It's not the worst thing in the world to say, but it's not what I would classify as "tolerance".

What about Huckabee's answer makes you think it was disingenuous? Or rather, what makes you think that?
I think Huckabee was playing the "No true Scotsman" game. It's easy for him to say that he wouldn't vote for a Christian who doesn't walk the walk, because no true Christian would ever fail to walk the walk.

 
Welp, Kasich just lost my vote.
Were you surprised by his answer?
I dunno, I guess I hoped Kasich would say something a little more tolerant than "Don't give up on your Bible!"Actually I liked Huckabee's answer, even if I think he was being a bit disingenuous.
Why is it 'intolerant' to say "Don't give up on your Bible" (even if I am not a fan of that answer- I think this is a fair question)

What about Huckabee's answer makes you think it was disingenuous? Or rather, what makes you think that?
I don't know if it's intolerant. It's certainly douchey. As a test, imagine an atheist candidate being asked why a Christian should vote for him saying, "you should give up on your Bible."

 
bananafish said:
Hillary says she has a pastor read bible passages to her every morning. :hifive:
What, on the phone? In person? How does this work? Is he chained in the basement?

 
Joe Summer said:
Chadstroma said:
Joe%20Summer said:
joffer said:
Joe%2520Summer said:
Welp, Kasich just lost my vote.
Were you surprised by his answer?
I dunno, I guess I hoped Kasich would say something a little more tolerant than "Don't give up on your Bible!"Actually I liked Huckabee's answer, even if I think he was being a bit disingenuous.
Why is it 'intolerant' to say "Don't give up on your Bible" (even if I am not a fan of that answer- I think this is a fair question)
I don't think that tolerance and proselytizing are compatible with each other. Saying "Don't give up on your Bible" is just a variation on "You need to convert to my religion". It's not the worst thing in the world to say, but it's not what I would classify as "tolerance".

What about Huckabee's answer makes you think it was disingenuous? Or rather, what makes you think that?
I think Huckabee was playing the "No true Scotsman" game. It's easy for him to say that he wouldn't vote for a Christian who doesn't walk the walk, because no true Christian would ever fail to walk the walk.
I don't think thinks society has a clue what tolerance is. Tolerance is something that has been distorted and deformed by political correctness.

Tolerance is not that we never discuss our beliefs (whether Christian or atheism or anything else) but the very opposite in fact. That you actually can talk to people who believe or think differently from you in a respectful manner and be perfectly fine with them even if they do not convert to your side (whatever side that that may be). Being tolerant allows you to have rational and intelligent conversations with people without letting anger and other negative emotions detract from the discussion. It allows you to learn from others and at times can change or alter your own thinking. It allows you to engage with others. That is what is so important about tolerance. Tolerance is not that you don't talk and I don't talk and the last thing you ever do is urge someone to consider your views. That is silliness though regretfully it seems how the American culture has evolved.

He said that he would rather vote for a genuine atheist than a not genuine Christian. So.... whether it is or is not the true Scotsman- it is the same thing. Again, I am missing how that is disingenuous.

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Chadstroma said:
Joe Summer said:
joffer said:
Joe%20Summer said:
Welp, Kasich just lost my vote.
Were you surprised by his answer?
I dunno, I guess I hoped Kasich would say something a little more tolerant than "Don't give up on your Bible!"Actually I liked Huckabee's answer, even if I think he was being a bit disingenuous.
Why is it 'intolerant' to say "Don't give up on your Bible" (even if I am not a fan of that answer- I think this is a fair question)

What about Huckabee's answer makes you think it was disingenuous? Or rather, what makes you think that?
I don't know if it's intolerant. It's certainly douchey. As a test, imagine an atheist candidate being asked why a Christian should vote for him saying, "you should give up on your Bible."
Sure. No problem with that perception though I am not sure I share it. I guess for me it would all be about the tone that it was said. And the difference in tone between "Don't" and "Should" (positive vs negative) in your example. Again, I am not a fan of the answer but I do have a problem with someone saying that that is intolerant (though to be fair, I can imagine a tone in which it was said that would make it intolerant).

 
bananafish said:
Hillary says she has a pastor read bible passages to her every morning. :hifive:
What, on the phone? In person? How does this work? Is he chained in the basement?
My money is on the chains in the basement with duck tape on his face. Riiiiiiiiiiiiip "Now, what do you have to say today?" and a desperate reply "2 Timothy 2:9: for which I am suffering even to the point of being chained like a criminal. But God's word is not chained!"

:P

 
Tolerance is not that we never discuss our beliefs (whether Christian or atheism or anything else) but the very opposite in fact. That you actually can talk to people who believe or think differently from you in a respectful manner and be perfectly fine with them even if they do not convert to your side (whatever side that that may be). Being tolerant allows you to have rational and intelligent conversations with people without letting anger and other negative emotions detract from the discussion. It allows you to learn from others and at times can change or alter your own thinking. It allows you to engage with others.
Kasish wasn't just sharing his beliefs. He was telling someone what they should do. That's not very respectful.

Like the other poster said: it may not have been "intolerant", but it was kinda dooshy.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top