Our top choices for leadership are embarrassing, why ? , yeah why ??? TV, media, and crap education ring any bells ..... eat the rich, anarchy, destroy the present system, WAKE up .... beam me up scotty , brings to mind that movie, "Network".

"I'm not going to take it anymore", but shit I'm stuck here .... what's a mother to do ? Read the Tao?

This is why all non-Christian Americans, not just atheists, need to demand from the canidates to answer as to why they are pandering to one religion for votes.

What society is doing today is exactly oposite of what the founders invisioned. They were humans and panderd as well, but all of them from deist to Christian understood that goverment was of the people, not of the Christians.

They dilliberately left out of the Constitution and mention of Christianity and Jesus.

THEY WERE FOR FREEDOM OF RELIGION, no one should doubt that. But they were against monopolies of power which is written in 3 places.

1. The establishment clause of the First Amendment

2. "No religious test"

3. No manditory swearing to any deity in the oath of office required at all.

Since the cold war Christian revisionists have waged an effective war on the truth of the history of this country. They would have you, the non-Christian citizen of any label, beleive that it is your duty never to seek any office even though you pay taxes. They would have you believe that you are a mere guest in the house of Jesus, even though the Constitution makes no requirement of any citizen to swear to Jesus.

The fact is that "God" in the mind of the founders was a matter of concious, not goverment favortism. "God" was not printed on our first currancy and it was not in the pledge(written by a Christian who insisted they not add any referance to God) because he believed that the pledge was not a deity thing, but a citizen thing.

Our nation went through a Revolution and 2 world wars without this Christian propaganda hijacking national symbols.

These same people who insist on God in the pledge and on our money would not want to give the same equal exposure to the same mass scale for the Barbary Treaty(Treaty of Tripoly) articall 11, |"As the goverment of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion"

Freedom of religion did not start with the Mayflower. Those people did seek to excape the king, mostly to find new resources. But they did so so that they could establish their own sectarian camps that were very dogmatic.

It wasnt untill the Constitution and it's writting that the founders faught and squablled about HOW to represent religion, since none could agree on one view, they decided to protect freedom of religion by leaving it up to the individual by not playing favorites to one over another.

Jefferson in his penning of the Virgina Religious freedom act convinced a very dogmatic state, even before the revolution, that it was within their best intrest, that when writting law, that they base it on common consesus and not common dogma.

Unfortunatly right wing fearmongers would have everyone believe  that anyone who doesnt bow to Jesus, is incapable of holding office. This attitude is unacceptable under a Constitution that garuntees equallity. THIS IS FOR ALL NON CHRISTIANS READING THIS, NOT JUST ATHEISTS.

They think secularists are facists when secularists are every every religion, and atheists both democrat and republican. They are simply people who understand that there is a "time and place" for everything. 

Just like you wouldnt play football in a hocky rink, a state house, a courtroom, nor capital hill are churches. They are not there for Christians to say, "Jesus is our president".

If these Christians want a goverment run on religion, to understand what a bad idea that is, ask a Christian in Iran how much of a voice they have.

It is a fallacy that secularism is a dirty word. Quite the oposite. It is because of secular goverments that a Church and Mosque and Synogouge and Temple can all be in the same city or town. It is the reason that we now have Jews and even a Muslim and an atheist in our Congress.

But, it will not stay that way if Christians insist on promoting Jesus via goverment force. That can only lead this country to end up being just as dogmatic and divided as the Middle East is.

Freedom of religion is garunteed. But no sect or ideology is intitled to hijack the govement and speak on behalf of everyone as to what they should believe. 

When Malcom X blasted white racists, could you blame him? We have something that he didnt have untill the end of his life. He finally realized how to seperate white racists from all whites. Certainly we as atheists find deity claims absurd, but we must understand that there are those within theism that do not wish us ill will, no matter our dissagreements.

And you are absolutly right, time will allow for the de-stigmatizing of atheists. Just as it was for blacks and gays, someday when you say that you are an atheist the worst someone will do is debate you.

I have been active since 01 and to see where atheists were then to where they are now is like night and day. Atheists in America at least, are far from mainstreem. But to compair where atheists were in 01 to having Infidel Guy on prime time TV and RRS on Nightline and all the atheist authors on the best seller list, it is a fast progression exceeding a pace I expected.

I think in 40 to 60 years as our voice grows the negitive stereotypes will dissipate and more and more atheists will partisipate in all levels of politics. If Thomas Jefferson a deist who denied the virgin birth and death of Jesus and equated it to magic can be president, to quote MLK "We shall overcome".

 It all depends  upon upkeep and drive. In all our blasphemy and criticism I  do at the same time think it is important to convey to theists that even though, "We think they are full of shit", atheists are not looking to create a facist state where freedom of concious does not exist.

These were the good old days...

JFK had to say things like this because the average American was afraid that he would allow the Pope to run the country.  So, I'm not ready to give JFK a medal for the speech.  He had ulterior motives.

Too bad candidates today didn't have similar "motives."