Why Is Atheism a Bigger Obstacle to Political Office Than Mormonism?

    Published on 8 November 2011 by AlterNet


    When America was founded, it was the first modern nation to throw off the rule of absolute monarchy and prove that democracy was feasible. But at the same time, when America was founded, it was hardly a democracy at all. The vote was denied to women, to millions of enslaved human beings — to everyone except a relatively small number of its citizens. Despite the Constitution’s prohibition on religious tests, many states had their own established churches that their citizens were compelled to support, and prejudice against Jews, Roman Catholics and other disfavored groups was ferocious.

    In large part, the history of America has been a story of one group after another coming forward to demand the equal rights that had been denied to them, and winning those rights through strife and struggle. This process of social change is still playing out today, but some groups are further along the path to acceptance than others.

    A 1999 Gallup poll asked Americans whether they would vote for a well-qualified presidential candidate of their own party who happened to belong to one of the following groups: Catholic, Jewish, Baptist, Mormon, black, woman, gay, or atheist. Only 49 percent of Americans said they would vote for an atheist candidate, by far the lowest percentage of all the groups. By contrast, 79 percent said they would vote for a Mormon, and even 59 percent said they would vote for a gay candidate. All the other categories had better than 90 percent agreement.

    In 2007, Gallup asked the same question again. In this more recent poll, Mormons’ popularity dropped to 72 percent, but again, the only category that a majority of voters refused to even consider was atheists. And this discrimination extends outside the political arena. A survey in 2006 found that atheists are “America’s most distrusted minority,” ranking below immigrants, gays and Muslims in the question of whether average people think we share their view of society. This accords with what I’ve previously discovered for myself: anti-atheist bias is still a potent force in American politics, and it doesn’t just come from the right. It’s Republicans who are primarily making the charge that atheists are evil and un-American, but Democrats aren’t exactly lining up to defend us.

    It seems likely that Americans’ tolerance will again be tested in the 2012 elections. There are still no plausible atheist candidates for national office, nor are there likely to be any in the near future; but a Mormon, Mitt Romney, is the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination. Will his faith be an obstacle? In a piece published on AlterNet, Joe Conason argues that we shouldn’t be troubled by the differences between Mormonism and Christianity, but he says little about what those differences actually are. Here are some of the more significant ones:

    Read more

    Be sure to ‘like’ us on Facebook


    1. I don't think that there is no way that an Atheist could find common acceptance with an average Christian. It is only the common belief that the Bible is an encyclopedia that becomes a point of argument as to the truth as such. If the Atheist were to speak on morality in terms of accountability of deciders and empowerment of the rest of us. If they spoke of empathy and how Jesus's Golden Rule is common to most religions and most Atheists as well, then I think that such a person would find themselves quite electable.

      It is only when you ask people in generic terms about religions (or lack of them) that they will have only their personal prejudices and thoughts to imagine the candidate to be like, that they imagine the Atheist to have Ideas an actual person running is likely not to resemble in any fashion.

      George Lakoff lays out such a completely secular vision that could work very well.[youtube 5f9R9MtkpqM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f9R9MtkpqM youtube]


    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here