It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jesse Ventura Shares Surprising Poll Results: Would You Elect An Atheist As President?

page: 1
20
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+2 more 
posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 06:39 PM
link   
On this week’s Off the Grid, I reveal America’s changing religious landscape. In 1958 a mere 18 percent of Americans said they’d elect an atheist for President, but today, 58 percent say they’d elect one. Plus, I reveal results from the Off the Grid poll we conducted on the issue. Tune into this all new #WWJVD to see the results!

If you didn’t take the poll, I still want to hear your thoughts! Leave me a comment below.




posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 06:43 PM
link   
Good evening Governor.

Do you have a link that will provide info on how the poll was conducted?

I agree with your comments and am as surprised as you, but I'd like to know the small details if they are available.


+4 more 
posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 06:48 PM
link   
You lost me at imaginary friend.

But it shouldn't matter who is in office so long as they don't impose their belief or non belief on others.

Or try to deride their constituents...
Like claiming we have imaginary friends.




posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: JesseVentura

A good question.

If he was an activist atheist, emphatically not.

If that was his personal belief, had no history of working/legislating against religion or the religious, had good ideas, I'd consider it.(especially if there was no real alternative, such as neither being 'religious'.)

Much would depend who was running against him. If, for example, another candidate had similar ideas, yet was 'religious' and not a religion that was in conflict with Judeo-Christian Mores, I'd probably vote for the religious candidate.

"If one believes in nothing, he's likely to believe in anything...




edit on 26-8-2015 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)


+14 more 
posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 06:51 PM
link   
I would have no problem voting for an atheist. It would be nice to have a person in office that isn't hoping our constant wars in the ME may help to speed up Armageddon like the Evangelicals we have in office are hoping. The Founders were smart enough to keep religion out of politics too bad modern Americans aren't.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Being an atheist or following a religion really makes no difference, does it? Too many people in the world are acting as though religion somehow makes you a better person, at the same time, many people also think that atheism makes you a better person. The reality is that we are all just human and we are all susceptible to the same influences. A persons religious disposition means nothing when it comes to corruption as every man has his price.

That being said, it's hard to choose a good candidate since the choice always comes down to the lesser of two evils, or in the case of this elections, 20-some-odd evils. In the end it doesn't matter, the government is corrupt. You can elect someone who isn't corrupt, but the system will corrupt them. No man can have power without falling victim to corruption, it's the way life has been since humans first picked up sticks.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: JesseVentura
Good post, Governor. Thanks



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker



If, for example, another candidate had similar ideas, yet was 'religious' and not a religion that was in conflict with Judeo-Christian Mores, I'd probably vote for the religious candidate.


So you would choose someone over another as long as they believed something in accordance with the Judeo-Christian beliefs, even though their political ideas are similar?

There are no other factors that come in to play here?



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 06:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
I would have no problem voting for an atheist. It would be nice to have a person in office that isn't hoping our constant wars in the ME may help to speed up Armageddon like the Evangelicals we have in office are hoping. The Founders were smart enough to keep religion out of politics too bad modern Americans aren't.


I think you hit the point dead on. Religion and politics should not be together in anyway and no matter how hard a candidate might try to separate themselves from religion, the constituency will always pull them back into the argument. When it comes to the country, people need to put the constitution first. When we try to bring religion into the debate, people fight and nothing gets done.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Given all things equal? Yes.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Yes. That would be nice for a change. Like the late Christopher Hitchens says,religion poisons everything. Reason and logic will lead you to that conclusion,the only true one regarding religions in general,in my personal oppinion.
edit on 26-8-2015 by leopayaso1987 because: /

edit on 26-8-2015 by leopayaso1987 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 07:10 PM
link   
I would not vote for someone that doesn't believe in God as they would not represent me. I don't care too much about which religion or no religion as long as there is a belief in a prime mover or God. I would not trust an Atheist.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 07:10 PM
link   
I'd have absolutely no problem with electing an atheist as POTUS, provided they were just indifferent to religion and not against it. It is still a guaranteed freedom, after all.
But, I think it would make for a far more interesting spectacle to have an atheist Pope.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 07:13 PM
link   
I hope that, one day, all religions is gone.

Every single one of them.

But it wont ever happen, there is too many unsecure people on this planet. They need a religion to survive.

Such a shame. When all religion is gone, we can start a new better world.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 07:13 PM
link   
You guys are scary, we wouldnt even consider a religious person for office.

If we ask are you religious, if he says, i believe in God, i can bet you we would say, bye there is the door.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 07:15 PM
link   
a reply to: yulka

If I may ask, where does your particular 'we' hail from?


+7 more 
posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Having an atheist in the White House would be like finally having an adult to watch over the play ground.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: pfishy

Sweden, oh sry, swedes are "collective" should be me, we just are so used to the term we and not i



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Well I am in Tennessee so most people I know wouldn't vote for an Atheist, however I on the other hand would.

It would probably benefit us to have a government full of them so we aren't mixing the ideals of church and state.

We need more than a two party or three party system.

We need a reset/regroup for sure.

I had to get off FB for a while because it's so political... downright dumb really. Hilary and Trump are jokes. All of them are bought and paid for... not by the people.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 07:36 PM
link   
One of the biggest foibles of the Disunited Failed States of AmeriKKKa is its blinkered, fretful adherence to the "God delusion". Until the nation overcomes this psychological malignancy, it will forever be mired in pernicious wars - both internal and external - evolutionarily retarded racial issues and gross socio-economic inequity.


'We live in a country in which a person cannot get elected president if he
openly doubts the existence of heaven and hell. This is truly remarkable,
given that there is no other body of "knowledge" that we
require our political leaders to master. Even a hairstylist must pass a
licensing exam before plying his trade in the United States, and yet
those given the power to make war and national policy?those whose
decisions will inevitably affect human life for generations?are not
expected to know anything in particular before setting to work. They
do not have to be political scientists, economists, or even lawyers;
they need not have studied international relations, military history,
resource management, civil engineering, or any other field of knowledge
that might be brought to bear in the governance of a modern
superpower; they need only be expert fund-raisers, comport themselves
well on television, and be indulgent of certain myths. In our
next presidential election, an actor who reads his Bible would almost
certainly defeat a rocket scientist who does not. Could there be any
clearer indication that we are allowing unreason and otherworldliness
to govern our affairs ?
'

(The End of Faith, Sam Harris)




new topics

top topics



 
20
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join