Openly Atheist Prime Minister...

[oilyfan]

Originally Posted by Super Nintendo Chalmers

There are a bunch of unwritten criteria for US presidential candidates. Your chance at the White House decrease the further you stray from the following:

• white
• male
  
• Christian
• married
• parent
• over 6' in height

And it's very specific, the last and only Catholic President of the US was Kennedy, Protestants rule the roost.

[evman150]

I think the difference between countries can be boiled down to one speech-finishing line: "God Bless -----"

In the United States, this is absolutely, positively, one million percent compulsory for politicians to say.

In Canada, it is in no way compulsory; it makes the news for rubbing people the wrong way.

For the record, I don't think a "shout from the rooftops" atheist could be elected here. Then again, I don't think a "shout from the rooftops" Christian could either (to high office, anyway).

Your run of the mill average non-believer though? Of course they could be elected. Nobody asks questions or cares about a politician's religion in this country unless it's shoved in their faces.

[Red Slinger]

I think at some point in both Canada and US we will see an openly aetheist leader, although, likely sooner in Canada. Non-theists are the largest growing segment of the population. At the moment I believe the numbers are at about 15-20% of the population, and even higher among young people. I expect that in my lifetime I'll see a US President or Canadian PM that is openly aetheist. Even 10 years ago did any of us think it was possible for a black man with a African/Muslim sounding name to be elected President of the US? The demographics support this happening relatively soon.

[peter12]

Does having a religious leader even make a difference?

[Vulcan]

Ralph Klein was supposedly a follower of native spirituality. It never made any difference in his elections. Most of the time in Canada, a candidates religion is never brought up which I agree with.

[Max Cow Disease]

Originally Posted by peter12

Does having a religious leader even make a difference?

I've been chatting about this topic with a few folks I know for the past few days.

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 mean, there's Bush before the Iraq invasion mumbling about how the sinister "Gog and Magog" must surely be afoot in the Middle East. And tomorrow, the Americans could potentially elect a president who's devoted much of his life to the legacy of an illiterate 19th century treasure hunter who claims to have found a stack of all-telling golden plates buried on a hill after listening to the whispers of angels in his ear. Right on, here's the key to 12 thousand nuclear warheads, my man!

I personally think that the fate of the human race will always be at higher risk in a world where individuals cling to any sort of dogma, be it religious or not. For example, it concerns me that so many millions and millions of people around the world hold the view that some patches of dirt on the planet are more holy than other patches of dirt. In an era of advanced technology and weaponry, that's not only outmoded and embarrassing, but extremely dangerous.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Table 5

......the more religious they are, the less I trust them to make a fair decision.

Originally Posted by Iginla

This makes sense actually and Harper comes to mind immediately. Seems like he has a personal agenda with some issues..

I just can't let this lie...

What personal agenda and what issues?

[vanisleflamesfan]

I think it's funny how many Calgarians here are saying that Canada does not have a bible belt. Can't see the forest for the trees?

[Fluffy Bunnies]

Originally Posted by peter12

Does having a religious leader even make a difference?

Why dont you ask the Ayatollah.




The less "enlightened men" we have listening to an invisible boogeymen in their ear, the better off humanity will be.

Im saddened to say that an openly athiest Prime Minister or US President is something we will likely never see. There is way too much fear mongering and very easily manipulated people out there.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I have no idea which specific religion Nenshi, Redford, and Harper proclaim to be, and honestly, don't really care. To me, it's more a case of the degree of religion and how much it impacts their decision making in terms of policy......the more religious they are, the less I trust them to make a fair decision.

This is true, but only because we haven't taken it to the crazy place the citizens to our south have. Of course, I think a large part of that is political strategists actually encouraging the scenario so they can win at any cost. Then the candidates do not only talk about it, but base policy on it.

That is something we CANNOT let happen. So talking about it and keeping it fresh in our heads probably isn't a bad idea.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Iginla

This makes sense actually and Harper comes to mind immediately. Seems like he has a personal agenda with some issues..

Ahem

Let me just clear my throat.

Aaaand take a sip of this handy glass of water.

Ok

BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA

HIDDEN AGENDA

BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA

[Daradon]

Harper certainly is proving to be more of a big C conservative than he led on earlier in his career, and that has me disappointed and a little worried for a few reasons, but I'm not sure I would base it on his religion. The two definitely could go hand in hand, but they could be mutually exclusive anyway.

Though, I would definitely be worried about any leader making fair decisions if they talked about their faith and everything that goes along with it as much as candidates do in the States.

[TorqueDog]

Knowing what we know about Harper, I've been sort of impressed at his ability to keep his faith away from influencing policy (most notably, his recent rejection to open up the abortion debate again).

Originally Posted by First Lady

If people are embarassed by that or care whether a president is religious or not indicate to me; we may not be as progressive or open-minded as some like to believe.

Ah f--k it, I'll bite: Rejecting ideas does not immediately equate to closed-mindedness if we have valid justification for rejecting those ideas on grounds of bad evidence or flawed reasoning. We entertain discourse and the presentation of new ideas, but we will reject ideas without reasonable backing. This happens on a regular basis in our day-to-day conversation, so much so that we don't even notice it- it's a non-event.

Simply labeling oneself as being "religious" doesn't tell us anything about the person believes, and consequently it isn't so much about religion as it is belief, and how willing one is to detach their faith-based beliefs from running government.

And yeah, to echo Nyah's sentiment, I am embarrassed that we have a segment of society that feels the need to stick their noses into someone else's uterus with regards to reproductive rights, and admonishes us through guilt-trips, propaganda, and faith-based assertions that what that person does with their body is wrong according to the word of the divine and that therefore we should enact policy against it.

Would I welcome an atheist Prime Minister? Well that depends - being an atheist doesn't tell me anything about what else the person stands for. Just as I wouldn't want an atheist Gilles Duceppe as the Prime Minister (since it would mean separatists are running the country), I don't really have a problem with a Christian Stephen Harper running the country now. Could that change? Sure it could, but again, religion alone is not the problem, it's belief and how much belief impacts one's policies.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by vanisleflamesfan

I think it's funny how many Calgarians here are saying that Canada does not have a bible belt. Can't see the forest for the trees?

Calgary/Alberta both have a relatively high proportion of residents that identify as having no religious affiliation. By proportion, the only place less religious than Alberta is BC.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Calgary/Alberta both have a relatively high proportion of residents that identify as having no religious affiliation. By proportion, the only place less religious than Alberta is BC.

I think that's helped by the fact so many young/youngish people from BC move to Calgary/Edmonton/etc.

I don't know well a single person in real life I'd call a Christian (prays/goes to church at least three times a year/talks about god or jesus/etc). Wait, there's a guy I graduated with that is a schizophrenic now. He knocked on my parents' door a few years ago saying jesus was coming and the world was ending. Obviously anecdotal, and probably indicative of the circles I spend time in, but still. (Young) people laugh at christianity/religion here.

[Arsenal14]

Part of it is that Calgary has an extremely low average age in general and there is a strong correlation between age and religious worship. I know rural Alberta is more religious in general than the cities but I don't think it has been a deciding factor in any election I can think of. I can't say I know what religion anybody I've voted for is, nor do I care. Just a matter of time before we have an openly atheist Prime Minister but I don't think I'll live to see an atheist President.

[Nyah]

Originally Posted by evman150

I think that's helped by the fact so many young/youngish people from BC move to Calgary/Edmonton/etc.

I don't know well a single person in real life I'd call a Christian (prays/goes to church at least three times a year/talks about god or jesus/etc). Wait, there's a guy I graduated with that is a schizophrenic now. He knocked on my parents' door a few years ago saying jesus was coming and the world was ending. Obviously anecdotal, and probably indicative of the circles I spend time in, but still. (Young) people laugh at christianity/religion here.

This idea may seem foreign to you, but a lot of Albertans (born & raised) like myself, don't have to be from BC to be progressive/non religious. Saying that most of the progressive non-religious young people in Alberta come from BC sounds amazingly pretentious.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Nyah

This idea may seem foreign to you, but a lot of Albertans (born & raised) like myself, don't have to be from BC to be progressive/non religious. Saying that most of the progressive non-religious young people in Alberta come from BC sounds amazingly pretentious.

It's no secret the populated parts of BC are the most progressive in the country.

And what you said I said, I didn't say. But thanks for putting words in my mouth. Is it still pretentious if you're the one saying it?

[Nyah]

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. I'm going by what you said in regards to Alberta having a relatively low proportion of people that identify with a specific religion, and that being helped along by people coming here from BC. I just disagree with you in the sense that, the majority of the people here don't have to be from BC to be progressive and non religious. I was born & raised in Calgary and I don't know more than a few people that are religiously, well...religious.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Nyah

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. I'm going by what you said in regards to Alberta having a relatively low proportion of people that identify with a specific religion, and that being helped along by people coming here from BC. I just disagree with you in the sense that, the majority of the people here don't have to be from BC to be progressive and non religious. I was born & raised in Calgary and I don't know more than a few people that are religiously, well...religious.

Your'e new here. Just a heads up - playing fast and loose with words doesn't fly when discussing sticky subjects. You are still referencing and basing your arguments on things I didn't say.