Quote:
Originally Posted by JayP
This goes way beyond the initial statement at hand - "Insofar as someone actually believes the principles/prophecies of their faith, that's certainly something I take into account in judging, ultimately, their mental aptitude for high office."
I agree with pretty much everything you said, but it just seems unrelated to that comment and my response. Not voting for a candidate because you deem them less intelligent because of their beliefs is no different than not voting for a candidate because you deem them to have less moral values because of their beliefs (which happens today). There's a huge difference between that and all the issues you brought up with religious politicians unless my definition of mental aptitude is completely off base here. Being religious doesn't mean they are less competent in handling the mental aspects of being in high office. You might disagree with their decision making process, but that doesn't mean they aren't as capable of understanding the entire scope of the issue.
|
Again, the problem boils down to dogmatic adherence of religious teaching, and if you don't think what amount of scripture one takes literally has a negative impact on their mental aptitude for being "the man" in a domain where decisions directly impact the lives of hundreds of millions, you're sorely mistaken.
- If you sincerely believe that there in a human soul in the ~150 cells that make up a three-day-old human embryo, you aren't going to fund critically important stem-cell research.
- If you sincerely believe that your God intends for rape to occur and furthermore that the resulting pregnancy is a gift from that God, you aren't going to have much need for protecting the reproductive rights of women who would terminate that pregnancy.
- If you sincerely believe that the creator of the universe demands that homosexuals should be killed for their nature (because somehow a divine artificer made a mistake when he made them), you certainly won't have much desire to stand up for their rights.
Read again what he said: "Insofar as someone
actually believes the principles/prophecies of their faith...." We're not talking about moderates who think that their religion is about being nice and tolerant of others and, without a second thought, will ignore the horrible instruction found in their texts to do things we know today as immoral and obscene. We're talking about people who base beliefs about the natural universe and reality on holy books that have no more information about our world and how to move prosperously together as a civilization as they do about how to make a flavourful roast duck.
We have non-arbitrary reasons for holding illogical conclusions to important questions, and subsequently those who would foist them upon us, as suspect.