Monday, January 08, 2007

Why I could never vote for an athiest

Of the things that have startled me this week, THIS is one of them: "They [atheists] are distressed over polls that show that at least half of Americans are unwilling to vote for an atheist despite the Constitution's requirement that there be no religious test for public office. "
Who said that believers in God were asking for a religious test? Would an atheist vote for Rick Santorum? No, but evidently we should be distressed because that implies that atheists could be using a non-religious test for public office. I have doubts that any media flunkies would point out the double standard being held up here. Why is it some kind of discrimination when a theist says he believes in something, but it isn't discriminatory when an atheist says he doesn't believe in something?

Why won't I vote for an atheist? Because an atheist will most likely not have my interests in mind. That's why I'd rather vote for a guy like Santorum who will do the best job of representing me. Even though Lori Brown of the Secular Coalition of America says things like "We need to educate the public that people who don't have a god belief can be good neighbors and friends and moral and ethical people," I'm still skeptical. Call me crazy, but to me ethical would be not harvesting babies for scientific research, or killing babies because it would cramp your lifestyle. Aren't those the two big "religious" issues?

The fact of the matter is, atheism is a religion just like Christianity or Islam or any other. Atheists have their beliefs and some hold them militantly while others are a little more slack. To say "I have absolutely no problem with anyone believing differently than I believe, as long as they don't impose their religion on me or my government," as Ms. Brown says is nothing more than "you can believe whatever you want as long as my opinion wins."

The article I've been discussing acknowledges that only 2-9 percent of Americans don't believe in God. If that many believe in God, shouldn't the democracy of the free show that their beliefs will govern the country? The SCA says on its website "it promotes reason and science as the basis for policymaking, it also supports religious tolerance." Can science show why I love my wife? Can science tell me why I think she's beautiful? No. It can tell me that she has the hourglass figure that other men like too, but not why I think SHE in particular is gorgeous. It can't tell me why SHE is perfect for me. How could I trust science alone to tell me the true worth of the life of an unborn child? I can't trust it to do that. And since in the eyes of my faith their religion of science can't see the true worth of a child, or the elderly, or probably not even the worth in me I will not vote for it. I don't think all atheists are bad. I'm sure there are many who hold to some moral or ethical standard, though I think Sartre and Nietzsche would be sick of the idea.

Bottom line: Dostoyevsky was right "If there is no God, all things are permissable." Even if there is a social ethical standard that atheists hold to, have you not noticed it slipping further and further into the "dark side?" Those ethics aren't mine so I won't be voting for them. I will be voting for my faith's ethics.

No comments: