Apparently Stark is the highest-ranking American public official ever to do so. Story here and here.
Why the silence on the right? Considering the furor that erupted when Rep. Keith Ellison announced his intention to swear his oath of office on the Koran.
Will this help atheists, agnostics and skeptics gain just a little more acceptance in America?
Will this come back on Stark in the 2008 elections?
Nothing to add, except that he’s my congressman, and I had no idea.
I saw this a couple of days ago. There was a little bit of noise on the right wing blogs but it’s not getting much play in the mainstream press. I don’t think the silence means much except that it’s been a fairly low-profile story and Stark is not exactly a household name. If he was a presidential candidate, I think it would be a bigger deal.
A Unitarian in San Francisco? They may add him to the list of the general movement of Democrats to destroy America, but Unitarians are not generally considered terrorists.
He is self described as a non-believer, but still a Unitarian; he did not identify himself as an atheist with a complete lack of religious affiliations.
A Democrat Unitarian in San Francxisco is not likely to be harmed by a general statement of non-belief along with a support of secularism.
A Republican Southern Baptist in Birmingham,Jackson, or Pensacola would probably face some difficulties.
It couldn’t hurt. It might encourage others in elected positions to come out as nontheists instead of posing as theists (which insults both nontheists and theists).
It depends on what his district is like and what they think of his previous terms. A liberal district in California probably wouldn’t care that much.
Here’s the article from Stark’s hometown newspaper. The early reaction of his constituents appears to be: shrug.
Not all Unitarians are atheists. I don’t think the issue is that he’s a Unitarian. I wouldn’t be surprised if we do start hearing about this soon from some of the louder right-wing pundits.
Hey, good for him.
Of course Unitarians come with many different beliefs. However, the typical super-theist who fears and hates atheists is unlikely to look upon those “odd” people in a Unitarian church in the same way that they look on a “professed” atheist such as Madalyn Murray O’Hair or Michael Newdow. Therefore, the extreme reaction to a Congresscritter, already known to be one of those strange Unitarians, is not liable to be a big issue when he responds to a questionnaire saying that he is has no theistic beliefs, (and not stating, “I declare that there is no god.”).
Um, probably not, because he’s 75 years old and this is his 18th term, the voters apparently like him. Plus this is California, perhaps the most liberal place in the country 
we’re talking about. If this were Mississippi or Tennessee, he’d be out in a heartbeat.
He’s my Congressman too (hooray!) and this article was on the front page. Here’s why it won’t have any effect:
He’s one of the most liberal people in Congress already. He had the hate on for Bush and the war long before it became popular. The righties can’t dislike him any more than they already do.
He doesn’t represent San Francisco, but some of the surrounding area. Those people in San Francisco are Nazis compared to us. 
Christians are a minority in this area, and Christians who would have a problem with this are a much smaller minority. Notice that the only clergyman who objected was a Sikh. Them having two non-Christian people commenting (3 if you count the UU minister as non-Christian) did not represent a big effort to find diversity.
Pete always wins with big margins. There are very few election signs around, and he sends most of the money raised for his campaign to Democratic candidates who need it.
Warm weather and Pete Stark - I do live in paradise. 
In my town that super-theist has other problems. A while ago the one evangelical on our school board tried to propose a day of prayer. Someone else on the board said he’d sue, the proposal went nowhere, and she didn’t even run for re-election.
BTW, there has been no reaction in the local paper to the article, not even from the right wing nutjobs who write in also. I’m sorry to say there is also an atheist nutjob who writes letters also.
!!! Cite? I didn’t think there was any county, city or congressional district in the U.S. with a minority Christian population. Not even in New York City, with its many Jews.
Let me check - but I meant my town, not the entire district.
You didn’t know that he was honest?
Oooh, he’s a Unitarian nontheist. Big deal. He goes to church, he’s not a weird pagan, he’s probably more religious than 60% of the self-identified Christians in this country.
A. How many ostensibly Christian pols are only pretending to be observant, & barely at that?
B. Rep. Hank Johnson (Ga.), just elected, is in Soka Gakkai!
C. Mazie Hirono doesn’t appear to practice any religion at all (although she was raised in Pure Land Buddhism, which apparently is super-mainstream in Japan, where she was born).
Well he had a perfect cover
Who’d suspect a politician?
My point being that she was raised in a default form of “religious belief”–rather like being nominally Catholic in this country.
This area has a huge – possibly majority – population of Indians and other Asians. So it’s quite possible Christians are in a minority.