August 2006 Weddings
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Religion and the POTUS
One of the aspects from the Powell interview popped back into my head today when he said the correct answer to if "Obama was Muslim" is "So what". I greatly agree with this; I identify as Catholic but am not overly religious (I have faith but the Church can be a little misguided).
If there were to be a serious party candidate that was Jewish or Muslim or an Atheist or any other Non-Christian religion would that change your vote and what do you think would be the opinion of said cantidates party and the US population
I wouldn't care one way or the other as I feel we should push as much as possible to separate Church and State like our founders intended.
Edited for my lack of writing ability
Re: Religion and the POTUS
my read shelf:
I don't think they'd have a snowball's chance, but honestly I said that about both HRC and Obama not too long ago. It would be a serious uphill battle, esp if they were Muslim. You've gotten the same forwards I have.
It wouldn't change my vote at all.
Generally, I maintain that as long as they understand that their religion is part of their private life and may not influence their lawmaking, that's fine. Separation of Church and state should be maintained at all times.
However, flameful and un PC as it is, there are some religions that would greatly call into question a candidate's intellgence and credabilty in my mind. For instance, a Scientologist? Believing something that stupid would seriously make me question their judgment on all things. But I give a pass to the old religions (i.e. older than like 40 years, yikes). At least it's very hard to prove those things are false and unbelievable. Sadly, Mormonism falls into that category a bit for me. I don't believe, for instance, that Romney is that into his religion, but that is kind of a crazy thing to believe. And so new. At least several generations of people have been Mormon, which gives it a leg up over Scientology.
I do think society would care A LOT.
I would prefer an atheist candidate, but I don't think they'd ever have a chance on the national level.
As far as religious candidates, I have a spectrum. If they believe some stuff that is definitively false (like creationism), I probably couldn't vote for them. I don't care if they say it won't affect policy; it tells me about their critical thinking skills and whether they choose to believe science or their religion. That is hugely important to me. I wouldn't vote for a scientologist, either.
As for the mainstream religions, anyone who is moderate in their belief AND whom I trust to not put that belief into policy has a chance. I'm not happy about Obama's promise to give even more money to faith based groups, but I still voted for him. That is putting his religion into policy, but at least I'm trusting that he won't try to legislate morality in the same way McCain would. That's where I just have to have faith in the face of no evidence
Well, I don't care as long as their religion doesn't interfere with my life and my liberties. I think this would be a HUGE news story that would get shoved down our throats ad nauseum until the day of the election. I'm certain it would have a serious detrimental impact on the candidate's abillity to win. In fact, I'd go so far as to say they would lose as a result of it.
My personal preference would be to have an athiest or agnostic in office just becuase I think that they would be the best stewards of seperation of church and state. I think electing one would be virtually impossible in this country right now.
Other than that, I dont care what religion they are as long as they dont legislate it.
BB, I get what you are saying about Scientology and Mormonism, but are they REALLY that much more ridiculous than other religions, or is it just becuase they are new and we havent accepted their "weirdness" yet? I mean Christianity has some pretty crazy stuff in it too.
I don't think Mormonism is that much crazier, although we do have documents that Joseph Smith was a con-artist prior to founding his religion. That kind of casts more doubt than the unknowns of the bible.
But, scientology? L. Ron Hubbard told everyone he was writing fiction. Yet, people believe it? That's what makes it so much worse. Well, that and they don't exactly have good representatives to make their case.
Oh yeah, Joseph Smith was a nutter. He married lots of children. GROSS.
Mormonism came out of a time and place where all sorts of cults were taking off. Mormonism was just more popular.
Mormon settlers also killed all the people already living in Salt Lake. It's got some pretty shitty beginnings.