yeah he's convinced himself enough to say it on twitter. his evidence is reading retweets from 16-year-olds

It was a semi-rhetorical question. Thanks for the literal answer.

I guess, the point I am trying to make, is as long as you suborn insitutionalised religion, and prevent anyone from getting elected who is not religious, you are hardly in a position to criticise anyone who gets elected for lack of logic or critical thinking.

Nice gig if your "self sufficiency" happens to involve being entirely supported during and after by your poet mentor who inherited all his wealth from his wife.

At what point does the media start just saying, "In other news, Trump pulls another fraudulent claim out of his ass this morning..."

Feel bad for Americans. This guy is your head of state, his crazy mumbo jumbo posts are the official policy of your country. Boggles the mind.

So apparently the White House issued a press release that was word for word from an Exxon Mobil press release. Total amateur hour.

We already have an atheist (more than likely agnostic, though) President. His name is Donald Trump.

Christianity is just the "home team religion" of the United States.

At the end of the day we're still tribal. I think you'd be hard pressed to find any President/Prime Minister that isn't the religion of the majority of the country. It's just not an America thing.

Why would the corporate elite want to impeach him? He's going to slash taxes, deregulate, disband the EPA, gut social spending, he's for all of the good things. Probably the Flynn takeout/Russia leaks are just a warning shot across the bow for Trump to remember that while he's ****ing over the people make sure he enriches the right people and not the wrong Russians along with himself. Goldman Sachs has plenty of representation within the administration so it doesn't seem like a life or death struggle by any stretch.

The whole racist agenda is just kind of a red herring, it rallied up the base so it's whatever. Creates a level of uncertainty and dissent but tolerable overall. Of course most of the elites would have been happier with Hillary which would've been the more standard track of granting civil liberties in exchange for raping everyone economically, but hey Trump's not so bad either.

No atheist is prevented from being elected President.

It's just that the American people choose another path.

The vast, vast majority of Americans are not "born again" Christians. They just celebrate the holidays that they grew up with. Believe in the God that they grew up with. And hope when they die they get to go Heaven. Most American's aren't religious fanatics.

There's no way Trump's the first one. If anything, I'm sure the majority of presidents were/are atheists.

Yup.
There was a great post a week or so ago that I was too far behind to acknowledge, but was I think one of the best, most poignant ones in this whole thread that maybe America has never been so honest as it is now.

And still the people who are going to be hurt most are the ones who believe their government is there for them.

I would say agnostic, not atheist.

Idk, the further back you go, the less common it was to be an atheist. "Majority" would surprise me. Is there a particular reason you think that?

I don't think you understand how for 40+ years now it's been beaten into ALL American heads every day how IT'S SO TOXIC TO CALL PEOPLE RACIST JUST BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE WITH THEM POLITICALLY, I MEAN ANY REASONABLE MAN CAN SEE DAVID DUKE IS THE ONLY REAL RACIST LEFT AND LOOK HE'S SO CUTE AND CUDDLY

It's amazing that anybody is awake

This is ludacrious.

No particular reason. But aren't most presidents from a line of wealthy families or highly educated? Being president is all about public image too so it would make sense they say they are religious when in fact they are not.

There's a pretty good argument that a lot of Deists in the Founding Fathers' day were just using that as cover for their atheism/agnosticism

So a very early President could easily be atheist, deep down in his SECRET HEART

As tenuous as that is, the larger point is that it's not actually the case that the further back you go, the fewer non-religious people there are. There's peaks and valleys

I mean, we got all the God stuff in government the 1950s

Of course, a Catholic was unelectable before that, so... win some lose some?

Since argument by anecdote is apparently completely acceptable when it comes to immigrants and crime, I leave you with this

C'mon. What he really believes is irrelevant; he pretends to be religious just enough to keep his moron-filled base happy. He'd have been dead in the water on day one if he'd gone anywhere near either of the bolded words.

I'm an everyday Joe in an ultra-blue Northeast state. I've had people explode in anger on the spot on multiple occasions for my mere mentioning of the fact that I don't believe in God. What do you think happens to a guy during the primary process running for national office who does as much?

At no time soon will we have a true, out, open atheist or agnostic as President.

This is manifestly untrue. The reason that people like Trump get elected is that half the people voting for him think they will get a theocracy. They just don't know what that means.

Manmohan Singh was Prime Minister of India from 2004-2014, he's Sikh; in their 2011 census India was 79.8% Hindu, 14.2% Muslim, 2.3% Christian, 1.7% Sikh

Price of freedom

Just like terrorism

Not by law, no. In practice?

Do you see where I am going with this?