Do you or do you not feel that fundamentalists of any religion should be allowed to hold political office?

Question

If so, why, and if not, why not?

My name kind of gives away my position, but I'll withhold my feelings on the matter for the moment.

Answer 1

No.If they are likely to promote their religious agenda rather than do what the country needs they should not be able to hold office. The country needs someone who can set aside their personal beliefs and do their job.

Answer 2

Every man or woman is an individual.  As a voter, I will judge them by what they say and what they have done in the past.

Answer 3

I believe there should be absolutely no religious test (pro or con) for officeholders. The voters will decide fitness.

Answer 4

I think fundies should NOT be allowed to hold political office.

That is like bringing religion and the state together in a marriage.

The church and the state MUST be kept apart.

Cheney is a fundy - is he not? Bush not so much.

Look at where the world and the USA is today, man.

In very deep doodoo.  

Answer 5

no never should a fundy be allowed to hold position they would only do whats ebst for their religion not for the people

Answer 6

If people elect them, then that is their business.

Answer 7

Despite how much I despise fundamentalists of any religion, I don’t think they should be barred from political office, merely on the basis of their religious fanaticism. The health of our democratic process is predicated on the notion that we have an open and free environment that allows for the introduction of all ideas, no matter how revolting some of those ideas are to us. If we start engaging in suppressing views just because they happen to be offensive to us, then we are no better than the fundamentalists we loath. We become fundamentalists of a different stripe. Fighting the enemy is okay, but it becomes a futile effort if you start to turn into your enemy.

Answer 8

It is highly (ok ridiculously) unlikely I would ever vote for one, but no religious test means no religious test.

They should not be barred from office because of their religious views.

Answer 9

Palin is a holy roller pentecostalist!

Answer 10

Speaking as a Christian, I personally don't think it a very good idea for a fundamentalist to run for any kind of political office. First of all in order to become a politician you have to take an "oath" of office and that is forbidden in Scripture.

   James 5:12   " But above all, my brethren, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or with any other oath; but your yes is to be yes, and your no, no, so that you may not fall under judgment."

  Matthew 5:33-37   "“Again, you have heard that the ancients were told, ‘YOU SHALL NOT MAKE FALSE VOWS, BUT SHALL FULFILL YOUR VOWS TO THE LORD.’ 34 “But I say to you, make no oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, 35 or by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet, or by Jerusalem, for it is THE CITY OF THE GREAT KING. 36 “Nor shall you make an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. 37 “But let your statement be, ‘Yes, yes’ or ‘No, no’; anything beyond these is of evil."

  Also if a fundamentalist is running for office to "make society a better place to live" by getting laws changed etc, , it's the wrong way of going about it.

   We all know that you cannot legislate away sin. You cannot force and unbeliever to act like a fundamentalist by passing morality laws. That's shear nonsense.  Lastly the Bible tells the fundamentalist to keep themselves unspotted from the world and politics are about as worldly, corrupt and evil as you can get.

  James 1:27   "Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world."

  That's my take on it.

Answer 11

I think it depends on the individual and their record.

If they have a record of attempting to change laws and statutes to be in line with their own doctrines, instead of the laws and statues representing the will of the majority, then we should not vote for that person.

If they have a record of representing the will of the people, then there is not a problem with them in office.

I don't think there should be a rule or law banning fundamentals from the right to run for or achieve office.  I think it's our responsibility as voters to learn their records and political stances and vote based on the facts of their past combined with what they are saying now.

Answer 12

I agree with you, A fundamentalist of any kind, religious or otherwise, should never be allowed to hold a position of office. A politician must be flexible to the needs of the people they represent, after all, we don't vote them in because we want them to get everything they want, we vote them in in the hope they will give us everything we want.

Answer 13

In a democracy, we need to give the majority of the people what they want and if the majority wants something that is not exactly desirable to the rest, that is the right of the majority to have it in a true democracy.

Remember, those individuals, if they do a bad job, can always be voted out of office.

Answer 14

It is strange that fundamentalists are seen as a security risk and cannot get a high security clearance yet they can stand for office where they can do far more damage!!

George Bush is hardly a fundamentalist but has taken the country to war so many times stating it was his god given duty!!

Heaven help us if an old man gets elected and dies putting a fundamentalist into the presidency - global war would surely follow!!

Answer 15

No.

If you think about it, fundamentalist Christianity at least  is a very Orwellian religion.

Who needs the Thought Police when there are slick televangelists and ministers condemning anything that even looks like it might fall outside their narrow belief system? (Or do televangelists embody the Two Minutes Hate more? I can't decide - they go with both so well.) If you look at most Christian fundamentalists, you'll find the same unthinking obedience and duplicity of thought that characterizes the Party - and the same need to demonize anything they can't control or understand.

Isn't it doublethink when you ignore scientific facts that contradict your faith? Or when you claim to spread the love and "good news" of Christ even as you encourage persecution and hate crimes against atheists, pagans, Catholics, eastern religions, and homosexuals? Or when you rant against the "hedonist atheists" even as you yourself are guilty of fornication and fraud?

And speaking of Catholicism, the fact that fundamentalists despise the Catholic Church - the oldest form of Christianity - never looks good. Just like how the Party eventually vaporized the Revolution's original leaders. (I don't see what the conflict is about. The fundamentalists hold all the worst attitudes the Catholic Church ever did. Oh, yeah - doublethink. I keep forgetting.)

Heck, the comparison between Christian fundamentalism and the Party is so close, you don't even have to change the Party's infamous slogans.

It seems they're never more at home than when they're imagining yet another specter for their followers to be terrified or outraged at. Andrew White beat me to saying it: "The main doctrine of a fanatic's creed is that his enemies are the enemies of God."

Many people saw 1984 as a warning against communism, but it's really a warning against fascism. Politics aren't the only breeding ground for it - the Fundamentalists have demonstrated this from pretty much the first moment they gained any kind of power.

I'm not saying the Party and the Christian right are an absolute, perfect match. But the similarities are blatant. (Falwell, Robertson, etc)

And growing.

Answer 16

A Fundamentalist is NOT the same as a Fundie! I know some very nice people who identify themselves as Fundamentalists.

ADD: Everyone has the right to run for office. If they get elected then that is the voters' fault.

Hopefully any voted official would hold there duties to the office above their personal agenda. (OK so I cannot say that with a straight face).

Answer 17

I believe that elected officials should reflect the important values of the population.  Denying people access to public office based solely on their religious beliefs is a clear violation of the separation of church and state.  

I think your name may be more vague than you think.  On the one hand, your name and the tone of your question suggests that you think religious fundamentalists should NOT be allowed to hold political office.  HOWEVER, your use of the word "VOTE" suggests that your beliefs are similar to my own!

My take...should they be "allowed" to hold office...absolutely...IF they can convince enough people to VOTE for them to win the election.  By the same token, I think it is absolutely YOUR right to refuse to VOTE for them and even to encourage others to do the same based solely on their religious beliefs!  If the entity that determines whether someone should be "allowed" to hold office is the government/law, then I am ABSOLUTELY opposed to denying religious fundamentalists the right to hold a public office...on the other hand, if it is the VOTE of the people, then I suppport it fully!  

Answer 18

I think religion should be kept out of politics period. If he can keep his religion at home I have no problem. If he can't, he shouldn't be there.

Elections just tick me off. Religion is not supposed to be germane in an election, but it's all people talk about.

Answer 19

If it's a problem, they won't get elected in the first place.

Answer 20

If it occurs through the democratic process then so be it. However, yes I think it would be better if religious extremist were not running the country. Unfortunately no one can become the president in todays world unless they are fundies.

Answer 21

Ahhh.  The talking snake people.  Medications may help.  But maybe not.  Scary.

Answer 22

If by fundamentalist, you mean crazy then I don't think they should hold public office. Because they are obviously not sane and can't make rational decisions.

Answer 23

We can't legally ban them from holding office, but all people who care about the future of their countries and the planet should work to keep them from getting elected. Fundamentalism crushes critical thinking and encourages evidence-free politics. Look at Sarah Palin, who believes global warming isn't real and that creationism should be taught in public schools. That kind of irrationality is leading us right toward the abyss.