Let's talk!

[benlehman]

Hey, Atheists: Remember all the fun we used to have on this journal? Man, that was a good time.

So here's a thing: On the balance, would you rather live in a country that -- while guaranteeing freedom of religion -- required all office holders to be atheist? Why or why not?

I'd be really interested to hear answers from my Dawkins-fan friends.

Religious folks, you can play too: Answer the same question but for your faith.



My answer: I have no idea how such a country would even function (agnosticism / deism isn't exactly ... rigorously testable) and I wouldn't anyway. Diversity is strength and all that.

Comments

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

I think "keeping the crazy people out of government."

[icecreamemperor.livejournal.com]

Growing up in a different culture never really seemed like the same thing as 'being crazy' to me.

Also as others have already gone over it's a pretty poor implementation for avoiding crazy people. Political shibboleths are almost always a bad idea, especially when they aren't even about an issue that is directly political. The fact that every single politician in the culture says they're religious is strange, but it's also revealing - I still think some of them are sane, competent legislators, and others are not.

I also kind of doubt that even half of the politicians in question have a sincere, intellectual belief in God, or at least one that has the slightest impact on their behaviour.