People With No Religion Underrepresented...in New Congress

Politics requires lying through ones teeth, all the time!

Instigating and supporting wars killing untold numbers of people in far away places. Coveting money above all else and using criminal means to get it, whatever the cost, are all good Christian values. See, Jayzuuuus would have supported it all if he were alive today.

Those politicians always like to show what good religious people they are. The photo-ops at church, invoking religion in speeches etc, yet are some of the biggest warmongers and criminals ever to walk the planet, and so it has always been.

Religion should play no part at all in politics. An atheist is just as capable of running things as a self proclaimed Christian, for example, and at least will rip us off without bringing up sky fairies and scripture to cover their acts.

I would say to those who think religion in the government does not have
any effect, just look at morality laws, laws that attempt to govern our
sex lives, what we can hear and or see as adults on television, what we
can say or do in some areas because there have been cases of people
being fined for "cursing".

Reality is that every single day i live with the consequences of what
someone else believes is true and if some of them have their way as
an atheist i would not be able to marry.....

I don't know what more you need, in god we trust on our money? in the
pledge, 10 commandments which are really pointless anyway posted
as though they were the best moral ideas ever to come about, 2 of which
deal with gods clear jealousy of other gods..... i mean really? no influence?
yeah.

Simple fact of the matter is that religion is divisive and oppressive of anything
they feel others should not do and yes they do act on that and force others
to capitulate to their way of thinking or else. They may not behead people
just yet but honestly i don't wanna wait until that starts happening before
we wake the heck up.

Once any politician has been in Washington long enough to make any difference they are not following Jesus teachings.

They follow their own corrupted 'religion', so concern is warranted, but they sure are not followers of Christ.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
So, it doesn't bother you that the vast vast majority of Congress-members are 'religious'?

No. It's irrelevant.

Elected officials need to pay attention to their constituents.... ALL of them.

Why do you think that just because someone might pray or go to church, that they would ignore the constituents that don't pray or go to church?

Do you have any information showing that those who don't believe in God are being ignored by the Congress members, and that they are being ignored because they don't believe in God? If so ... please post it.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
The Founding Fathers's premise. Keep religion OUT of politics. Yet, nowadays, it seems only those 'candidates' who EMBRACE religion and USE IT to get votes are the, ahem, erm, 'winners'.

The founding fathers wanted there to be no official state religion and they said that the government should not officially support a state religion. They said nothing about making sure that religious people aren't elected.

If religious people get elected, then it's the constituents that are electing them and putting in office those they want. The person elected is supposed to represent the people, and it's the people who have elected that person. You want more atheists in office? Then go run.

Atheist or Christian or Jewish or Hindu or Pagan or whatever ... it shouldn't matter.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

It's a crying shame that this should even be an issue in our Constitutional Republic, and it shouldn't be.... but as long as our congress critters are basing the laws they pass (or don't pass) on not just religious grounds, but on majority rule, it is an issue and will continue to be an issue. And rightfully so.

But in my ponderings on the matter, it all comes back to understanding the whys and wherefores, and who benefits?

Our Founding Fathers went to great lengths to ensure religious freedom without government interference of any kind. They not only did not trust each other, they did not trust the religious institutions.

They also went to great lengths to ensure that everyone had basic inalienable rights -- based on their understanding of Natural Law, not religion -- that could not be transferred, altered or taken away by anyone, including the majority.

This is the difference between a democracy (mob rule) and our Constitutional Republic (inalienable rights for all).

These lines have been blurred -- deliberately and knowingly. As a result, all sides are claiming power and authority over others that they do not have. At least not Constitutionally speaking!

If our congress critters did their job, no one should have to worry about their faith (or lack thereof) being represented on Capitol Hill because there would be no laws passed that would compromise their worship in any way.

(Yes... I'm still a die-hard red-white-and-blue-blooded all-American idealist... and sometimes feel like the only one left!)

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

...if they are the majority then, by our democracy, their will should be done by their elected officials...

As I just replied to the OP, this misguided line of thinking is why we have this problem.

We do not have a democracy. We have a Constitutional Republic, in which basic inalienable rights are declared and protected, and cannot be taken away by anyone (including government) for any reason (including majority opinion of their constituents). Religious freedom is one of those. Our congress critters take an oath to uphold the letter and spirit of the Constitution. That is their first and foremost responsibility in doing their job. Passing any and all laws that violate or infringe on those inalienable rights (including religious freedom) therefore violates and infringes on the Constitution they took an oath to uphold.

Anyone that votes for someone based purely on religion or lack of religion is someone i worry about.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

The reality of the issue is that, when it comes to the political rats in power, the only serve themselves and the fat wallets of those that feed them.

Religion is just used by this political rats to entice the population into believing that they follow a God or support a higher purpose.

The only people been unrepresented is the ones been duped by the political rats and that means the religious base that support them.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: strongfp

How are your rights as an atheist been violated? Have there been laws passed limited your rights based on this? Civil or criminal action, unjustified, as a result?

Actually yes. Several states still have laws on the books preventing atheists from holding office. That's not counting the unofficial stance of many municipalities and counties who do everything in their power to keep atheists and the non-religious out of public service.
Unelectable atheists

BTW. America is not a democracy. It is a Republic. Read the constitution. It's in there.
Section 4

The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.

a reply to: JBurns

Hey, thank you It's refreshing to see someone compliment another here on ATS....



-NF

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

At least we aren't talking about the Presidential office. All but one of our Presidents have been Protestant, and that exception was JFK who was Roman Catholic. So you could also say that 100% of our Presidents have been Christian. The bias is SOOO bad that, if you aren't Protestant, you best just not run. JFK had to deal with a ton of crap for being Roman Catholic. Good luck if you are atheist, jewish, etc.

Anti-Catholic prejudice was still very much in the mainstream of American life when JFK decided to seek the presidency in 1960.

a reply to: bloodreviara

Simple fact of the matter is that religion is divisive and oppressive of anything
they feel others should not do and yes they do act on that and force others
to capitulate to their way of thinking or else. They may not behead people
just yet but honestly i don't wanna wait until that starts happening before
we wake the heck up.

Excellent post. How anyone can watch the nooz and not see religious coercion and dogma causing all manner of upheaval is beyond me.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Why do you think that just because someone might pray or go to church, that they would ignore the constituents that don't pray or go to church?

Oh, come on now. Do you not pay attention to people like Rick Perry, Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, etc?
Those people, as I explained on here years ago are Seven-Mountain-Dominionists. They INTEND to force theocracy on this nation. They DO ignore the non-religious and the anti-religious.

They think those who do not believe in their evangelical slop are possessed by demons - they even think that they can 'pray away' those demons who 'control' people who aren't religious. They claim that they can 'sense' which 'demons' are in control of buildings, organizations, geographical areas, etc.

It's nonsense.

I don't care if someone just prays on their own time, God-speak has NO BUSINESS being a topic of legislation, ever.

How can you even say that with what this abomination calling themselves ISIS are doing right now? About John Hagee calling for a nuclear attack the Middle East to 'bring on the apocalypse'? Those defending the hypocrisy and barbarity of Netenyahu's actions?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Oh, come on now. ... They DO ignore the non-religious and the anti-religious.

Prove that those in in the New Congress ignore their non-religious constituents.

It's nonsense.

What Sarah Palin, Rick Perry and Michelle Bachman believe is nonsense to me.
But they aren't in 'the new congress'. (that's your thread subject).

- Show us how the New Congress ignores it's constituents that don't worship like they do. If there is a coming attempt at a Theocracy, as you claim, then it shouldn't be hard to do.

- And if there are members of the New Congress that ignore atheist constituents, what is the solution? Force people to vote for members of congress who aren't religious believers? Then it's not a free vote. It's appointment.

- Show us how the safeguards against a state sponsored religion aren't working. Looks to me like we are making progress with getting rid of old laws that are based in religious reasoning .. like how we'll finally have marriage equality. Looks like progress to me.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
God-speak has NO BUSINESS being a topic of legislation, ever.

Sure. Laws favoring religious notions shouldn't happen. Can you list how this happens and how the 'New Congress' is ignoring constituents to make it happen. (opening Congress with prayers shouldn't happen either. It's a tradition that should be done away with, IMHO. )

Here you go, folks:

TEA PARTY AND THE RIGHT
Thugs and Demagogues: 7 Right-Wing Wackos the Media Will Shove Down Our Throats in 2016

Palin now more of a political entertainer than candidate, was there, like many others, to inspire the most right-wing Iowans to ignore the GOP mainstream and select a presidential nominee who puts God, guns, less government and the Constitution (as they see it) as their compass.


Every possible candidate present—Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, ex-Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, real estate mogul Donald Trump, brain surgeon Ben Carson, ex-Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and others—said America’s future depends on returning to a past before big government, but never big business, was public enemy number one, and when American military might made dictators and terrorists cower.

These people scare the crap out of me.
Don't tell me they aren't trying to take over this country - look it up.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Looks to me like we are making progress with getting rid of old laws that are based in religious reasoning .. like how we'll finally have marriage equality. Looks like progress to me.

It has been looking like progress, you are right.
These asshats want to reverse that process.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Typical alternet. What does any of that far left rhetoric have to do with people with no religion supposedly being under represented because the New Congress is ignoring those that don't worship or who worship differently?

a reply to: FlyersFan

It was a study by the Pew forum. Yep, sometimes alternet actually presents real research.

The point is not that I or my neighbor are being ignored - you're the one who brought that up, I believe. It says that Congress as a 'representative body' is disproportionately heavy in some areas and light in others.

Percentages, you know.

The point is not that I or my neighbor are being ignored - you're the one who brought that up, I believe. I

No. You did. Here -

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Elected officials need to pay attention to their constituents.... ALL of them.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
how are the REST of us (non-religious) being represented? We aren't.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
They INTEND to force theocracy on this nation. They DO ignore the non-religious and the anti-religious.

So I'm asking for proof of what you said ... that the New Congress is all religious and therefore they are all ignoring the non-religious and anti-religious.

You also said this -

They think those who do not believe in their evangelical slop are possessed by demons - they even think that they can 'pray away' those demons who 'control' people who aren't religious. They claim that they can 'sense' which 'demons' are in control of buildings, organizations, geographical areas, etc.

So all the people in congress who are Christian talk that way?
Would you show us which people in the New Congress have said this?
Thanks.

(side note - for the record, yes I also think thats 'slop')