I think this country would be better off with an Atheist in the White House. There would be defiantly a seperation of church and state. People would be treated better by laws,etc. during this time. What else so you think could be accomplished if this happened?
We NEED someone with an understanding of The Constitution & Bill of Rights! And the concept of obeying the law! I do not give a damn what religion they are, or not.....
To be honest. I'll wager that we;ve already had an Atheist in the White House, probably a few. But the kept it in the closet. What we really need is for one to come out, so to speak.
We could recover the 71 Billion dollars or so by taxing churches like the businesses they've become, particularly the millionaire preachers like Osteen and Dollar.
@maturin1919 Uh, no, they don't and their property is also tax exempt as it is called part of their church.
@maturin1919 I think you should check on that. I believe you're mistaken and I'll do the same.
\
@maturin1919 They put all of their property under the church's name, use it freely and it is tax exempt.
@maturin1919 If they don't do that their accountants and lawyers are idiots.
@maturin1919 Yes, I do, and if you'd examine these organizations closely you'd see it too. As for the IRS asking questions, they've practically stopped examining ANY religious organization, particularly the Evangelical Christians. Are you aware of the Johnson Amendment? Per that law, any tax-exempt organization that endorses specific candidates or parties is supposed to lose their tax exempt status. How many of these organizations are being so sanctioned? NONE. Trump even has one of them in the White House. Wake up and realize how deep their grip is on our government.
@maturin1919 The IRS is why we have good accountants and lawyers. So you're saying church leaders and officials don't take advantage of tax exemptions and write offs? Once again if they don't they need new accountants and lawyers. We'll agree to disagree
@ronnie40356 And I'll repeat Myself. When a religious organization, or ANY tax exempt organization, makes specific endorsements of a particular party or candidate, they LOSE that protection according to the Johnson Amendment. The IRS is NOT doing their job or people like Franklin Graham would not STILL be enjoying their organization's tax exempt status. I"m also saying that churches have become businesses and should be treated as such, not as some kind of sacred system that is beyond responsibility for their property and other possessions.
@sterlingdean I'll agree with this and your point that they should be taxed but won't. It doesn't negate my point about their lawyers and accountants taking advantage of the system.
@sterlingdean, @maturin1919 We agree that everyone tries to pay as little taxes as possible. So do I. I was debating your point that pastors and/or church workers will not hide their property, homes, cars, etc. under the church exemption. I disagreed on that, if I understood you correctly.
@maturin1919 We seem to be going in circles. I'm here trying to point out that pastors can, and do hide assets under the church exempt umbrella. So I'm guessing we'll agree to disagree.
@maturin1919 Apparently not. So we'll agree to disagree about whatever the hell each of us were talking about.
Religious organizations would be taxed
@ToolGuy because religion is political. It's been a valuable and effective tool for generations
@ToolGuy because they're getting a free ride without contributing....
@ToolGuy of course taxes are income for the government... I'm taxed, am I more political because I'm taxed..?
@ToolGuy tax refunds come from federal, state, and city.. we do pay federal taxes..
@ToolGuy I don't have time to comment, but thanks for the link. I'll watch it.
@ToolGuy yes, I know.. the refund comes from an overpayment to the government..
@ToolGuy no, but I looked up an article about it.. try reading this
Being an atheist doesn't immediately make you a good person. Also, the president doesn't make the laws, Congress does.
Having an admitted atheist in the White House would probably be like having a black man (or woman) in the White House . The public would micro castigate everything they do to the point that nothing gets done.
What we need are people who firmly believe in the separation of Church and State.
There are believers who are committed to the ideal of our founders and keep their personal religious beliefs out of their politics (pro-choice Catholics, for instance). But, what we have right now is a lot of supposed "public servants" who are catering to a religious minority and putting their religious beliefs above our Constitution.
What I want is to see the day when we do not know, nor care, what a candidate believes, or does not believe. It should simply NEVER come up.
trump was a closet atheist, now he uses the moronic idiot evangelistic’s to further his fascist power!
Not all atheists are ethical or moral obviously, seems we are acceptable to being scammed, conned, and ripped off without actually understanding what is taking place!!!
Finding a moral ethical Atheist who would appeal to the voting public seems insurmountable at best!!!
One can hope, just not in our lifetimes!!!
I think if a theist read the above they would immediately mention Stalin,Pol Pot, Mao etc. I think an honest president would be all that is needed.
I agree & their political opponents would spend millions on ads comparing them to those blood thirsty dictators. Theists also believe in magical fairy beings and that the earth is 5,000 y.o. Very few atheists would preside like they did, or be able to do what they did as long as the US remains a democracy. That in itself is looking doubtful.
Any problem with a science-based solution. Right now we have a vice president who has been made Virus Czar who would like nothing better than to hasten the "End Times" he believes are coming and to bring about Armageddon.
That didn't occur to me. You bring up a very good point about the dummies in D.C. Which makes the world we live in even sader.
An atheist need first to become the Most Qualified Candidate for the PRESIDENCY OF THE MOST RACIST, CAPITALISTIC AND WARMONGER NATION ON EARTH.... and still does not means the electorate will vote for that so qualified atheist candidate... The nature of the beast.
I agree....From my point of view anyone who believes in the religious crap is not mentally fit to lead this country.
Just because a Politician claims he is a believer and or believes in a religion does not necessarily mean he actually believes in this nonsense .It only indicates he has the common sense not to jeopardize his political future by being truthful .And honest politician is an Oxymoron
I agree but it's not gonna happen in the foreseeable future..
@TheMiddleWay First, an atheist is not going to be elected. Second, being "out of touch" with the religiously intoxicated is a plus IMO, but then I'm an atheist. That doesn't mean the atheist couldn't be a good president. What it means, and I think what you're saying is they couldn't run it because 80% of the country would refuse to allow them to do a good job. We'll agree there.
The problem is there are still too many religious persons for an atheist to get elected. Maybe by 2028 we'll have reached a critical mass.
@AnViAn I don't know. Even though I voted for him, I was surprised that Obama won, because I didn't think there were enough Amerians who weren't racist to vote for him.
I think there are some religious persons who would vote for an atheist, but it is hard to tell just how many there are. Because of Obama's election, I moved to a more optimistic outlook... although Trump's election has made me wonder.
Like most people said here on this thread: atheism does not equate to moral superiority, but I somehow think an atheist president would be interesting to see run the U.S. I personally believe that Sam Harris would make the best atheist president but he's not a politician and I suspect doesn't dream of being one.