Why does the president of the U.S. have to be Chirstian if were not supposed to discriminate?

Question

Why is it that the president of the U.S. has to be a Chiristian in a non-relgious position if we in the U.S. claim not to discriminate on the baisis of race, religion, gender etc in all other areas such as business, ,employment and housing, yet its acceptable to discriminate about the presidency?

Answer 1

so wat if hes cristian if u r saying we shouldnt discriminate u r discriminateing rite now stupid but bush is still just a JACK ***.

Answer 2

this is not about religion. it is about politics.  MOST people are sheep and will follow and believe anything; especially if a famous person or publication says it.  out of the smart people, there are followers and leaders.  the leaders spend alot of brain power trying to get the sheep to do and say what they want.  

when it comes to politics, if you want the sheep to follow, you have to be the way THEY want you to be. you want to appeal to the majority (or pretend to appeal). if the majority is white, christian, married, military, patriotic, etc. then you want to be the same(or pretend to be the same).  you have to remind them repeatedly of how you are like them so they won't forget it.  brainwashing takes time and repetition. they have to relate to you before they give their votes.

if you can be charismatic enough to try to change the trend, then you may have a chance.  it may not me now, but you paved the way for the  future.  people have to get used to change and it takes time.

Answer 3

Huh?  There is no law saying the president HAS to be any religion.  However, the idea of freedom of religion in this country, as it was understood at the beginning of our nation, means that each of us is free to express a religious preference.  It is true that most people prefer a president who is Christian, so tend to support those candidates.  And they have every right to do so.  

Freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom FROM religion.  Get it?  You also misunderstand btw the meaning of "separation of church and state" - which by the way is not stated anywhere in the constitution.  It means that an organized religion cannot RUN the government.  It doesn't mean that no one in government can express a personal religious preference.

You have to understand that the earliest settlers to America came here precisely because they were not permitted to worship (Christianity) as they wanted to by the English government.  They came here to be free to worship however they chose.  It is THAT ideal we built a country upon.  

The idea of NO religion being expressed, is what the Soviet Union was built upon.

Answer 4

Doesn't have to be, but the fact is, there's a whole lot of people out there who just don't understand anyone who is "different." I am a well-educated deist... would I have a chance in politics? Probably not. It's awful that things are that way, but hey, you can't blame anyone but the public. They can vote however they want, and most of them think anyone not Christian is scary and bad. Sad but true.

Answer 5

we want someone to represent ourselves

someone who has the same ideas and beliefs

&that includes religion right?

almost 90% of people are either christian or catholic

so of course the will vote for them

does that help any?

Answer 6

he doesn't have to be christian

Answer 7

The short answer is this... It is easier to get elected if you are a Christian. This is due to the fact that 80% of all Americans are Christian, or at least were raised to believe in God.  An atheist is unelectable. As is a Muslim. At least a declared one. The US was founded on Judao / Christian values. And just for the record, there is NO LAW stating this. It is simply an individual choice to vote for a Christian or not. There fore, it is not state sanctioned discrimination. There fore it is not a violation of Church and state law.

Answer 8

maybe cause Chirstian people are not like other religons chirstian people dont care there nice to every one but other religons like ju or hindu they will be racisit

Answer 9

They don't have to be Christian.  

Romney and Lieberman wouldn't have gotten far enough to run for president if there were a religious test.

Answer 10

They don't have to be.  Why do you think that?

Answer 11

Excellent question.......you are right.  I am not sure why political leaders are usually Christian, it probably reflects the demographics of the population.  In public school where I live, saying the lord's prayer is forbidden, and I agree with that because it is discriminatory in favour of Christians.  There are many religions, we can't observe them all in public office or schools, and in my opinion it is totally irrelevant to the job/setting.  Down with faith-based voting, down with imposing one religion on everybody in public schools.....unfortunately, this is not how the religious right or left for that matter feels in the U. S.  It drives me nuts.