# Would you refuse to vote for a candidate based solely on his/her religion? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 4, 2006, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109 "2006-07-04T00:35:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/81 "2006-07-06T16:44:07Z")
My answer to the OP is that i vote based on a candidates expressed polies, not his or her religious beliefs. On the one occasion where I’ve actually had the opprtunity to choose between a theist and an atheist in a significant election I voted for the theist (the atheist was Jesse Ventura). ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/82 "2006-07-06T16:53:32Z")
[QUOTE=Monty] > [@](#): > > Silly me. I thought there were about a billion Muslims around the world. Is it a majority of them who think that God has given them the right to kill me? I seriously doubt it. Until you provide some cite for that assertion, I’ll maintain my doubts. > > On the other hand, I’ve met quite a few “lovely Christian people” who think they have every right in the world–given to them by God, of course–to tell me that I’m going to Hell. I will never understand why anyone gives 2 figs whether another person thinks they are going to go to hell or not. As a Catholic, I have been told plenty of times that I am going to go to hell, and frankly, I find such a statement to me more humorous than anything else. It certainly doesn’t hurt my feelings. If you know the truth, then it really doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks. I am not in a position to back up what **LonesomePolecat** says in terms of numbers, but I do think there is a huge, huge difference between someone thinking you are going to hell, and someone wanting to murder you to help the process along. > [@](#): > > Some of them have also expressed support of that nutjob who murdered a doctor who performed abortions. Now, I don’t believe for a minute that they represent the majority of Christians. > > Do you see my point now? I don’t see your point. Just because the number of Christians who think murdering abortion doctors is justified is a tiny percentage of Christians, it doesn’t follow that the number of Muslims who want to murder Americans is a tiny percentage of Muslims. As I said, I don’t know the numbers, but your example from one to the other doesn’t necessarily follow. Personally, I would not avoid voting for someone based solely on his religion or lack thereof. On the other hand, it is not surprising that the candidates I like tend to be relatively religious Christians & Jews. It doesn’t have anything to do with the specific religion, but more that religious people tend to have the same kind of politics I do. If the person was athiest or anything else and shared my political POV, that’s great, too. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/83 "2006-07-06T16:57:56Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > The DOI is irrelevant to US law. The Constitution makes no reference to God and most of the Founding Fathers did not believe in a God who was active in the universe. The COTUS is in no way based on any religious precepts. Yeah, yeah, the same old dodge. If you haven’t noticed, we’re not talking about what is legal. And you use a brush as wide as Texas when you say what the Founding Fathers beleived. And they—even Jefferson—believed the Creator was active enough to 1) Create man and 2) endow him with unalianable rights. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/84 "2006-07-06T17:03:01Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > Silly me. I thought there were about a billion Muslims around the world. Is it a majority of them who think that God has given them the right to kill me? I seriously doubt it. Until you provide some cite for that assertion, I’ll maintain my doubts. > > On the other hand, I’ve met quite a few “lovely Christian people” who think they have every right in the world–given to them by God, of course–to tell me that I’m going to Hell. Some of them have also expressed support of that nutjob who murdered a doctor who performed abortions. Now, I don’t believe for a minute that they represent the majority of Christians. > > Do you see my point now? If only ten percent of Muslims sympathize strongly with Islamic radicalism, that makes one hundred million Muslims who want to kill you. What percentage of the world’s Christians want to kill you? No matter how you look at it, Muslim extremism is a much greater problem for the world today than Christian extremism. Telling you that you’re going to hell isn’t nearly the same thing as chopping off your head. I see your point. It just isn’t much of a point. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/85 "2006-07-06T17:03:35Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Yeah, I know. Let’s keep this short. Although I am not religious at all, I do believe there to be a higher power. I think that is where we get the rights enumerated in the DofI from. If they are not bestowed by a higher power, they are the whims of man, and can be taken away as easily as they were invented and given. > > Most of the atheists I’ve encountered (mainly on this board), strong variety in particular, do not allow (by definition) for a Creator (Deist sense). Some even think the notion of religion is evil. I know it is responsible for it’s share of the world’s ills, but, on balance, I think it a positive. Plus, even if religions, as so far constructed by man, are working for ill, that does not mean that there is not a Creator. I see a logical flaw in their line of thinkiing that I’ve argued many times here before. > > I hope that answers your question. Since the question was, “Why wouldn’t an atheist make a good politician,” I’m afraid that you haven’t actually answered it. Why do you think an atheist would not be as zealous or as competent in defending the rights enumerated in the Constitution as someone who believes in God? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/86 "2006-07-06T17:29:57Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > Prove it, and prove that it matters. What matters are the facts on the ground; it doesn’t matter it I have the “right” to be free if I’m in a dungeon cell. :rolleyes: Prove that it doesn’t. And where rights come form does matter. If they are solely the invention of man, a man can come by tomorrow and say otherwise. And everything is then morally relative. Which, I know, you like. As do godless dictators like Lenin, Stalin Mao, and Castro. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > Ah yes; because I oppose a war of conquest by America, I must oppose people who fight _against_ such wars, and tyrants in general. I have said in the past that I _approve_ of the Iraqis who kill foreign soldiers, and regard it as their patriotic duty to kill as many as possible. I’m not a pacifist. No, you’re worse. You are the enemy. You know, maybe I should stop responding to your posts and spend that time starting a little penpal dialogue with Charles Manson. Six of one… > [@Der Trihs](#): > > Ridiculous. I seriously doubt that most _cared_ what they derived from. Your view of religion is so warped you cannot even entertain that many people hold it dear. And I think that many people would find it easier to put their life on the line for an absolute truth, a law of God, than the whim of man. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > Why is God’s opinion relevant ? A declaration by a god is just as arbitrary as one of mine or yours. > > No, that’s evolution; it’s functional, not philosophical. It goes to essence, that which defines man, a tiger, or a person with a diseased brain. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > And your proof of this is ? My posts explaining my position and yours revealing the ridiculous of yours. Go look it up. And take your time. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > Ah, but you’re only insane if most people diagree with you. You may want to review some of the pit threads against you before you ascribe to that theory. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > And some held candlelight vigils instead. Not to mention, has it occurred to you they may hate us because we’ve _hurt_ them, and not because of religion ? Has it occured to you that their religion tells them they should hurt us. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > Given our behavior, the whole world could suddenly become atheist or Christian or otherwise religiously unified, and they’d _still_ hate us. The rhetoric would change, that’s all. Let’s make belive you’re right about this, and they’d hate us. But would they kill us? Would they send their brothers and sons on to airplanes and strap bombs on them to blow us up. Would they be so willing to die for their hatred if they didn’t think there were 72 virgins waiting. And you know, this shows just how bizarre you are. You caonstantly rail against religion as fabtastical, deranged and the root of all evil. But when we talk about the one religion that actually fits the bill, you defend it’s adherents. I hope this reveals to all just how—let’s see, we’re in GD—just how “inconsistent” you are. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/87 "2006-07-06T17:41:46Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Let’s make belive you’re right about this, and they’d hate us. But would they kill us? Would they send their brothers and sons on to airplanes and strap bombs on them to blow us up. Would they be so willing to die for their hatred if they didn’t think there were 72 virgins waiting. Yes. Christians, too, believe in a paradise if they’re true to their faith, and there’s nothing inherent to Christianity that prevents it from being perverted the same way that radical Muslims have perverted Islam. Just ask Eric Rudolph. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/88 "2006-07-06T17:52:40Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Not confusing, really, but beside the point. What good reason have you to believe that an atheist in public office will be any less respectful of human rights than a Christian? Lincoln was an atheist, but did not for that reason behave as though people are cattle. Because tyhe rights are derived from a higher order. I don’t see how you can deny the logic of that. As far as I recall Lincoln was not a atheist. He was a fan of Paine, who was a Deist and believed in the after life. Also, I do think it is perfectly possible for an atheist to be in office and defend rights as staunchly as a Theist. The question was who I wouldn’t vote for and why. > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Of course they are. Either human rights are something as absolute and essential as the laws of mathematics, in which case they are the same whether God exists or not, or approves of them or not; or they are in the nature of preferences, moral judgments and policy decisions, which are just as arbitrary when God decrees them as when a mortal king decrees them. I see the laws of science that the universe operate under as the fabric of a world that would accommodate man. And that man is an intentional creation (whether via evolution or not). Rights coming from a mortal king are, indeed, preferences. Rights imbued by God go to the essence of his creation. That is why they are unalienable. Even possibly the least religious of the Fouding Fathers belived this to be the case. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/89 "2006-07-06T17:57:32Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Since the question was, “Why wouldn’t an atheist make a good politician,” I’m afraid that you haven’t actually answered it. Why do you think an atheist would not be as zealous or as competent in defending the rights enumerated in the Constitution as someone who believes in God? As I said, because he believes the rights are derived from a higher order. Whatever rights are in place, it would be much easier to think you should overturn them if you believe that they came from a mortal who preceded you as opposed to God. Just look to all the biggest despots: Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao. They delude themselves into believeinig that their view of the world is correct because there is no higher power to defer to. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/90 "2006-07-06T17:59:17Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Yes. Christians, too, believe in a paradise if they’re true to their faith, and there’s nothing inherent to Christianity that prevents it from being perverted the same way that radical Muslims have perverted Islam. > > Just ask Eric Rudolph. Yes. But are you trying to say that the incidence abd degree of perversion is the same between Christianity and Islam? You’ve got to be kidding. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/91 "2006-07-06T19:20:18Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Yes. But are you trying to say that the incidence abd degree of perversion is the same between Christianity and Islam? You’ve got to be kidding. I don’t vote for degrees, I vote for candidates. I feel completely capable of evaluating if an individual is a bloodthirsty maniac, whether they are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or whatever. The percentages don’t really enter into it. ---
**Author:** ![Ensign\_Edison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7ab992/32.png) [@Ensign\_Edison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ensign_Edison)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/92 "2006-07-06T19:23:01Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Yes. But are you trying to say that the incidence abd degree of perversion is the same between Christianity and Islam? You’ve got to be kidding. So have you. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/93 "2006-07-06T19:32:18Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Because tyhe rights are derived from a higher order. I don’t see how you can deny the logic of that. What logic? _You_ believe that rights are granted by God. Which is fine, and you are probably right in that most of the founders agreed with you to some extent. What you haven’t done is provided any kind of a coherent argument as to why an atheist would be less likely to respect those rights than a theist. There is, so far as I’m aware, no religion anywhere that includes ideas like freedom of speech, freedom of belief, or freedom of association as part of their religious code. There’s nothing in the New Testament about the right to bear arms. The Torah does not, to my knowledge, guarantee the right to assemble to petitition the government for redress of greivances. The Qu’ran lines up nicely with the 21st ammendment, but since we’ve ended Prohibition, I don’t think there are many other points of congruence between that book and the Constitution. The idea that the rights talked about in the DoI and specifcied in the Constitution are somehow guaranteed by God is not an article of faith in any religion I know of. So why should someone who is religious be any more likely to support them than someone who is not? At the very least, an atheist is never going to argue for the repeal of our rights on the grounds that “God wants it to be so.” > [@](#): > > As far as I recall Lincoln was not a atheist. He was a fan of Paine, who was a Deist and believed in the after life. What does that prove? I’m a fan of Thomas Paine, and I’m a stone-cold atheist. > [@](#): > > Also, I do think it is perfectly possible for an atheist to be in office and defend rights as staunchly as a Theist. The question was who I wouldn’t vote for and why. And in light of the fact that you think it’s “perfectly possible” for an atheist to be a good politician, why wouldn’t you vote for one? > [@](#): > > Yes. But are you trying to say that the incidence abd degree of perversion is the same between Christianity and Islam? You’ve got to be kidding. No, that’s not what I’m saying at all. Yes, there are more dangerous fanatical Muslims than Christians. So what? The fact that a religious terrorist is more likely to be a Muslim does not mean that a Muslim is more likely to be a religious terrorist. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/94 "2006-07-06T20:08:08Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > And where rights come form does matter. If they are solely the invention of man, a man can come by tomorrow and say otherwise. And they can do the same if a God decrees them. Also as **BrainGlutton** said, they are either intrinsic or not, _no matter God’s opinion on the subject._ > [@magellan01](#): > > And everything is then morally relative. Which, I know, you like. As do godless dictators like Lenin, Stalin Mao, and Castro. As opposed to Christians like Hitler ? Besides, what makes you think they believed in moral relativism ? Communism is _very_ absolutist. > [@magellan01](#): > > No, you’re worse. You are the enemy. You know, maybe I should stop responding to your posts and spend that time starting a little penpal dialogue with Charles Manson. Six of one… Ah, yes, the guy who disagrees with you on a message board is just as bad as the leader of a band of crazed killers. Typical _Atheists are the Devil !_ religious garbage. Given that religion is malignant by nature, I’m not surprised. > [@magellan01](#): > > Your view of religion is so warped you cannot even entertain that many people hold it dear. And I think that many people would find it easier to put their life on the line for an absolute truth, a law of God, than the whim of man. First, I’m quite aware that most people are religious; fools, lunatics and monsters, in other words. Second, most people are rather more impressed by, say, not having their friends and family killed, imprisoned or tortured than bad philosophy about God’s “absolute truth”. Third, religion has usually been on the side of tyranny, or _is_ the tyrant. If you were right, everyone would be the slave of the local King, ruling by Divine Right. > [@magellan01](#): > > It goes to essence, that which defines man, a tiger, or a person with a diseased brain. Essence is a meanlingess term. > [@magellan01](#): > > Has it occured to you that their religion tells them they should hurt us. And the majority religion here says everyone else should be killed; what’s your point ? I _already_ regard religion as evil; telling me _their_ religion is evil is pointless. > [@magellan01](#): > > Let’s make belive you’re right about this, and they’d hate us. But would they kill us? Of course; we’re killing them. It’s their duty to try to kill us in return. > [@magellan01](#): > > Would they send their brothers and sons on to airplanes and strap bombs on them to blow us up. Would they be so willing to die for their hatred if they didn’t think there were 72 virgins waiting. No, they’d choose better tactics. They’d still be at least as aggressive. > [@magellan01](#): > > And you know, this shows just how bizarre you are. You caonstantly rail against religion as fabtastical, deranged and the root of all evil. But when we talk about the one religion that actually fits the bill, you defend it’s adherents. I hope this reveals to all just how—let’s see, we’re in GD—just how “inconsistent” you are. :rolleyes: Has it occured to you that they have perfectly rational _non-religious_ reasons for hating and killing us ? I don’t approve of their _religion_; I simply think they are justified at killing foreign invaders and tyrants. > [@magellan01](#): > > As I said, because he believes the rights are derived from a higher order. Whatever rights are in place, it would be much easier to think you should overturn them if you believe that they came from a mortal who preceded you as opposed to God. :rolleyes: Please; that makes it _trivial_ to overturn them. Simply say “God wills it”, and your done; since God is a delusion, he won’t argue with you. > [@magellan01](#): > > Just look to all the biggest despots: Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao. They delude themselves into believeinig that their view of the world is correct because there is no higher power to defer to. Hitler and the Nazis were Christians, who behaved like Christians always do if they get the chance. The Communists believed in such things as the Forces of History, Marx, the proletariat, and so forth. You also ignore the millennia of Christian tyrants. > [@magellan01](#): > > Yes. But are you trying to say that the incidence abd degree of perversion is the same between Christianity and Islam? You’ve got to be kidding. Both _are_ perversion; so yes. The difference is, the Christians have a bigger military and far more money and nukes. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/95 "2006-07-06T20:13:20Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > The fact that a religious terrorist is more likely to be a Muslim does not mean that a Muslim is more likely to be a religious terrorist. Well, actually, yes, it does. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/96 "2006-07-06T20:20:32Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Well, actually, yes, it does. No it doesn’t; then there’s the definition of terrorism. A lot of what America’s done in Iraq can be considered terrorism, such as the “Shock and Awe” attacks ( sure sounds terroristic to me ), not to mention kidnapping and torture. The usual arguments against such things being terrorism to me ring of the old line “terrorist is what the big army calls the little army”. Since most American soldiers are Christian, that’s a lot of Christian terrorists. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/97 "2006-07-06T20:38:04Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > As far as I recall Lincoln was not a atheist. He was. He even wrote a book about it in his youth – and then burned the manuscript when a friend pointed out how publishing it would hamper his political ambitions. See [_What Lincoln Believed: The Values and Convictions of America’s Greatest President,_](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1400030730/qid=1152218211/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-8696644-3496124?s=books&v=glance&n=283155) by Michael Lind. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/98 "2006-07-06T21:13:51Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > He was. He even wrote a book about it in his youth – and then burned the manuscript when a friend pointed out how publishing it would hamper his political ambitions. See [_What Lincoln Believed: The Values and Convictions of America’s Greatest President,_](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1400030730/qid=1152218211/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-8696644-3496124?s=books&v=glance&n=283155) by Michael Lind. Uh, yeah, like I’m going to go aread a whole book because you think it says somehting it probably doesn’t. If you want to provide excerpts, go ahead. But please, don’t waste my or anyone’s times with lazy, ridiculous cites. [You might find this interesting, though:](http://www.humanismbyjoe.com/Lincoln's_religion.htm) (emphasis mine) > [@](#): > > As a young man, Lincoln read the theological works of the deist Thomas Paine, and it was well known among his friends and neighbors that he agreed with Paine and was a deist and infidel. The youthful Lincoln even wrote a manuscript, which he intended to publish, arguing against the divinity of Christ and the divine inspiration of the Bible… > > As a result, Lincoln’s later public statements about religion became guarded and discreet. He employed vague language such as “Divine Providence,” “Justice of God,” “Most High,” and other expressions that were generally consistent with his own deistic inclinations and the various religious views of his constituents… > > For instance, Jesse W. Fell had been secretary of the Illinois Republican State Central Committee, and was instrumental in bringing forth Lincoln as a candidate for president. Fell later wrote of Lincoln’s religious views: “He fully believed in a superintending and overruling Providence that guides and controls the operations of the world, but maintained that law and order, not their violation or suspension, are the appointed means by which this Providence is exercised.”… > > “He had no faith, in the Christian sense of the term - had faith in laws, principles, causes and effects.”… > > Lincoln’s law partner of 22 years, William Herndon, similarly related that Lincoln did not believe in miracles or the efficacy of prayer. … > > Moreover, Mrs. Lincoln quoted her husband as saying, “What is to be will be, and no prayers of ours can arrest the decree.” She explained he “was a religious man always, I think, but was not a technical Christian.”… > > … but many of them have testified that he was a Freethinker; that he denied the inspiration of the Scriptures, and that he always insisted that Christ was not the Son of God. . . ." I chose here an article from a humanist perspective, not one that is inclined to argue for my side. And even it makes clear that Lincoln was not an atheist. He, like Jefferson, didn’t believe in the divinity of Jesus or active God of Christianity. He was a Deist. Just like Paine. These continued attempts to portray the some of the Founders, and now Lincoln, as atheists never gets old, does it? I don’t mean to saddle you, **BG** , with the nonsense of others, but it is all the product of the same desperation. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/99 "2006-07-06T21:15:51Z")
> [@Ensign Edison](#): > > So have you. Thank you for your contribution. I hope you didn’t strain yourself. If you have nothing to say, why type at all? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109/100 "2006-07-06T21:37:21Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Well, actually, yes, it does. You think so, huh? Tell me, if all poodles are dogs, are all dogs poodles? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-refuse-to-vote-for-a-candidate-based-solely-on-his-her-religion/363109.md?page=6)