Would They Be Elected Today???

Our first six presidents, George Washington thru John Quincy Adams, weren't church going Christians. Most, if not all of them, rejected the divinity of Christ. Given the current religious climate in this country, do you believe that any of them would be elected if they were currently running for President of the US? Do you believe that people place too much emphasis on a candidates religious beliefs?

Oh I believe that our citizens place way too much emphasis on a presdential candidates's religious beliefs nowadays.

George Washington is easily my favorite president, especially because of his beliefs to not form political parties, but today he would be left in the dust. In his Tripoli Treaty he stated the fact that the United States is not at all based on Christianity and if he were caught saying that today he would have no chance at all.

I don't think they would, but not from their religion. They wouldn't because people are so far astray of what the first few intended that everybody would see them as radicals.

Oh I believe that our citizens place way too much emphasis on a presdential candidates's religious beliefs nowadays.

Click to expand...

No doubt. That's why almost every presidential candidate feels the need to voice their religious convictions. I saw a recent poll that showed 25% of those polled wouldn't vote for an atheist. Given this high number, I would doubt that many of our first presidents would be elected if they ran today. Just look how much people made a fuss over JFK being a catholic.

The Seeker said:

Our first six presidents, George Washington thru John Quincy Adams, weren't church going Christians. Most, if not all of them, rejected the divinity of Christ. Given the current religious climate in this country, do you believe that any of them would be elected if they were currently running for President of the US? Do you believe that people place too much emphasis on a candidates religious beliefs?

Click to expand...

Correct me if I am wrong.

• George Washington was never "elected" as he ran unopposed two times
• John Adams was an attending congregationalist
• Thomas Jefferson went to church if able to
• What Madison's concerned, Pinckney can hardly be called "opposition"
• The same goes for Monroe (, but indeed, doubts about his faith are serious)
• I have no idea about JQ Adams

While not an American, I do not believe that a nonreligious candidate could have serious claims on the presidency in the current climate.

i'm not entirely sure. They had higher standards and morals that they actually followed then do a lot of "religious" candidates do nowadays. i guess we'll just have to ressurect them to find out

I really don't think religion is playing as big a role in elections as religionists and the news media like to claim. They were viewed as the swing votes in the last few elections, because the electorate has been so profoundly divided on so many issues. But that will not be the case in the next elections. The country is no longer so divided on the issue of Iraq, or on which party is the least incompetent in terms of national security, economics, and emergency preparedness. So a few religious fanatics voting entirely on banning abortion and gay marriage are not going to hold any significant number of swing votes. And the result will be that neither party will have to pander to them as they felt they did in the past elections.

My own concern regarding the religions of our politicians is that they be able to set their personal religious beliefs aside so that they can represent the people who elected them, instead of their gods. I don't want any politician doing God's will. I want them doing our will. And if they can't do that, they should be honest enough to resign, or refuse the office in the first place. And I sure will NOT vote for any politician who claims he's going to restore America to a "Godly nation" or that he has a mandate from God to set us all aright in God's eyes. And I doubt that many other Americans would, either. We may be a nation made up of mostly Christians, but we definitely are not a "Christian nation" and we never were.

Thank God!

I really don't think religion is playing as big a role in elections as religionists and the news media like to claim. They were viewed as the swing votes in the last few elections, because the electorate has been so profoundly divided on so many issues. But that will not be the case in the next elections. The country is no longer so divided on the issue of Iraq, or on which party is the least incompetent in terms of national security, economics, and emergency preparedness. So a few religious fanatics voting entirely on banning abortion and gay marriage are not going to hold any significant number of swing votes. And the result will be that neither party will have to pander to them as they felt they did in the past elections.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you here. Abortion and gay marriage aren't just issues for religious fanatics. That's why all republican candidates with the exception of Guiliani are making sure that people understand that they're anti-abortion. Also, a Rasmussen survey indicated that 43% of those polled indicated that they would never vote for a Mormon (Mitt Romney). This to me is insane. I guess people think that if he's President that he'll make polygamy legal. Given that a large percentage of the population would never vote for a Mormon, I find it reasonable to believe that Thomas Jefferson, being that he rejected the divinity of Christ, wouldn't have a chance of being elected today.

My own concern regarding the religions of our politicians is that they be able to set their personal religious beliefs aside so that they can represent the people who elected them, instead of their gods. I don't want any politician doing God's will. I want them doing our will. And if they can't do that, they should be honest enough to resign, or refuse the office in the first place. And I sure will NOT vote for any politician who claims he's going to restore America to a "Godly nation" or that he has a mandate from God to set us all aright in God's eyes. And I doubt that many other Americans would, either. We may be a nation made up of mostly Christians, but we definitely are not a "Christian nation" and we never were.

Click to expand...

I do agree with you on this point.

George Washington was never "elected" as he ran unopposed two times

Click to expand...

I think Washington won one of the elections by a landslide.
I do know he rejected the new leadership spot many times before he was finally talked into it though.

Luke Wolf said:

I think Washington won one of the elections by a landslide.
I do know he rejected the new leadership spot many times before he was finally talked into it though.

Click to expand...

He ran unopposed. You're not elected when it didn't matter whether people actually did anything.

lombas said:

Correct me if I am wrong.

• George Washington was never "elected" as he ran unopposed two times
• John Adams was an attending congregationalist
• Thomas Jefferson went to church if able to
• What Madison's concerned, Pinckney can hardly be called "opposition"
• The same goes for Monroe (, but indeed, doubts about his faith are serious)
• I have no idea about JQ Adams

While not an American, I do not believe that a nonreligious candidate could have serious claims on the presidency in the current climate.

Click to expand...

• George Washington - Episcopalian
• John Adams - Unitarian (the Unitarians split from the Congregationalists)
• Thomas Jefferson - unchurched but expressed desire to be Unitarian
• Madison - Episcopalian
• Monroe - Episcopalian
• JQ Adams - Unitarian (in fact, he is one of the founding members of my church)

That said, they were all men of the Enlightenment, putting reason above religious tradition, and would not be electable today. (And Unitarians deny the divinity of Jesus.)

The Seeker said:

Abortion and gay marriage aren't just issues for religious fanatics.

Click to expand...

Just why is it that people in this country are SO hung up on sex??! Because that's most of what this is - who gets to have sex with whom, and women being expected to "live with the consequences" for having sex when men are not.

Sorry Seeker, this was not directed in any way at you. It's just that people are dying, every day, not only in Iraq but right here in this country. Poverty, violence... We're facing global climate change and widespread environmental pollution, which affects the poor and people of color disproportionately. And people are contracting and dying from HIV/AIDS every day, and yet the administration wants to restrict federal funding to abstinence only programs! In fact, it wants to target young adults up to the age of 29 telling them that they shouldn't be having sex until marriage.

People are dying and all some people care about is controlling who has sex.

I did read an article in the Kokomo Tribune today about the Mayor's (Matt McKillip) qualities. One of those listed was "he is a God-fearing man." Another article was soley about him being a "God-fearing" man.
So, it's even a big thing on the local circuits.

PureX said:

My own concern regarding the religions of our politicians is that they be able to set their personal religious beliefs aside so that they can represent the people who elected them, instead of their gods. I don't want any politician doing God's will. I want them doing our will.

Click to expand...

Actually, I have no problem with our elected leaders doing "God's will" if that's what they want to call it. I don't think that they should always be doing our will, tho most of the time they should. I would hope that most of the time that our will is the same as God's will.

Let me explain: In 1957, when Dwight Eisenhower sent troops in order to force the school in Little Rock to desegregate, he wasn't doing it based on the will of the people. To me, he was doing God's will. When Lincoln freed the slaves, he wasn't doing it based on the will of the people. To me, he was doing God's will. And actually, that's what he said himself.

Democracy is the least evil of all political systems. Meaning it still has its evils. One of them is tyranny of the majority. We as a people don't always do what's right. Sometimes a leader has to show us the way.

Just why is it that people in this country are SO hung up on sex??! Because that's most of what this is - who gets to have sex with whom, and women being expected to "live with the consequences" for having sex when men are not.

Sorry Seeker, this was not directed in any way at you. It's just that people are dying, every day, not only in Iraq but right here in this country. Poverty, violence... We're facing global climate change and widespread environmental pollution, which affects the poor and people of color disproportionately. And people are contracting and dying from HIV/AIDS every day, and yet the administration wants to restrict federal funding to abstinence only programs! In fact, it wants to target young adults up to the age of 29 telling them that they shouldn't be having sex until marriage.

People are dying and all some people care about is controlling who has sex.

Click to expand...

I agree with you completely. There is a great fear about sex in this country, especially when you compare us with other western nations and I believe that it's because of the Bible. Sexual behavior is mentioned in the Bible quite a bit and tends to treat anything sexual as a disease (i.e. treating female menstruation and male ejaculation as unclean). This is one reason why I tend to believe that religion is bad for society (although I will admit it has some good aspects).

Madison - Episcopalian
Monroe - Episcopalian

Click to expand...

Madison may have been raised an Episcopalian, but he shared Jefferson's views of religion. Not much is known of Monroe's religious beliefs but it is thought he may have been a Deist.

I think it's a shame that people put so much stock in a politician's religion when it has absolutely nothing to do with their ability to govern. Imagine what our country would be like today if Jefferson, Madison, Ben Franklin and others weren't allowed to participate in the founding of this country simply because they weren't true Christians.

The Seeker said:

Madison may have been raised an Episcopalian, but he shared Jefferson's views of religion. Not much is known of Monroe's religious beliefs but it is thought he may have been a Deist.

Click to expand...

I mean no disrespect to you Seeker but I do not consider Deism to be a religion in the usual sense of the word. It is a view of our relationship with God (or lack thereof as the case may be). For example, my view of our relationship with God is that I am a panentheist, but my religion is Unitarian Universalism. Other views are pantheism, monotheism/classical theism, polytheism, and deism... From my perspective, it is entirely possible for Monroe to have been an Episcopalian and also a Deist. Tho I would agree that it would be extremely difficult for him to have been an orthodox Episcopalian and also a Deist.

I don't think that Madison was quite as hostile towards religion as Jefferson was. Madison shared Jefferson's desire for a separation of church and state, but for Madison it was to protect religion from state, whereas for Jefferson it was to protect state from religion, imo.

I would add that it is almost certain the Jefferson was a Deist. (So you are in good company.) Just look at his version of the bible!

The Seeker said:

I think it's a shame that people put so much stock in a politician's religion when it has absolutely nothing to do with their ability to govern. Imagine what our country would be like today if Jefferson, Madison, Ben Franklin and others weren't allowed to participate in the founding of this country simply because they weren't true Christians.

Click to expand...

I agree.