If your government representative wasn't religious, would you care? Would you care if they were?

[Linda_d]

Originally Posted by jbtornado

I prefer we had more government representatives who were NOT religous

Not only that, but among those that claimed to be religious, that they at least acted like maybe they actually followed the tenets of the religion that they espouse.

[PedroMartinez]

I only care when they are an extremist. Be it an extremist Christian, an extremist atheist, an extremist environmentalist, an extremist racist (be it any race or ethnicity), an extremist government interventionist, an extremist union hack, an extremist greed monger, etc.

President Obama said he is a dedicated practicing Christian who sat in church nearly every Sunday. Does he push Christianity on anyone? No. Does he take orders from his pastor? No. Is he pushing to make Christianity the official religion of the US? No. That is how vast majority of religious politicians in the US are, be it Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Mormon (yes, I know they are concerned Christian), etc.

Religious political leaders are no different than politicians that have any other interest outside of politics.

[PedroMartinez]

Originally Posted by Linda_d

Not only that, but among those that claimed to be religious, that they at least acted like maybe they actually followed the tenets of the religion that they espouse.

List the members of the House that are part of a religion and which of those do not follow the tenets of their specific religion.

[greywar]

Originally Posted by Icy Tea

I'll pose this question to the atheists out there. Would you rather have your elected representative be a Christian or a Satanist? Would it matter to you?

Atheist/agnostic here. Yes that would matter to me. About 90% of the Satanists I have met have been crazy loons. Only about 1% of the Christians are.

now satanaist Vs's Michelle Bachman, the satanist gets my vote, cause I KNOW she is nuts.

[Haaziq]

I'd largely prefer a nonreligious representative, but wouldn't care if they're religious as long as they're not of the fundamentalist variety (anti-science, etc) and they don't try to get votes by pandering to the faithful.

Originally Posted by Icy Tea

I'll pose this question to the atheists out there. Would you rather have your elected representative be a Christian or a Satanist? Would it matter to you?

Your question is somewhat vague since there are different sects of Satanism just as there are different sects of Christianity.
If said politician was a LaVeyan Satanist (in which there is no god figure and Satan is only a symbol or idea), then I wouldn't care at all. A theistic Satanist, on the other hand, I'd view unfavorably.

[Volobjectitarian]

In the United States, there is no religious test for the privilege of holding elected office, and there is also a freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof protected explicitly by the 1st Amendment. If the lawmaker does not write, propose, sponsor or otherwise support laws that attack religious freedom of the individual, then I could care less what the personal beliefs of an elected official are.

Were I to care what a politician's beliefs are, I'd be far more concerned with their stance on welfare/nanny state socialism than I would their stance on religion.

[nmnita]

I care more about their ability to govern and their character than I do about their religion or lack of same. Regardless of their religious views, I do not want that to influence how they vote. This can work both ways, whether a person is influenced by the their religion or influenced by their lack of believing.