Monday, February 27, 2012
As an atheist I have to accept the fact that, as far as presidential politics is concerned, my worldview is the ultimate inconsequential minority. I may have lived to see an African-American elected president, and I may yet live to see a woman in the office, but there is zero chance that I will live to see an avowed atheist put his or her godless hand on a bible and take the oath.
OK, so let's look at the gods currently on offer in the latest clown show. Elect-ability aside, it appears that voters from here on out will have to pick between the Mormon, Catholic, and Protestant versions - a Muslim president perhaps being the only thing less likely than an atheist one.
Romney is the Mormon god's point man. Santorum is playing for the Pope of Rome, and president Obama is batting for Baby Jesus. But why, you might ask, is any of this relevant? Certainly, the two Republican candidates would like you to believe that it isn't. They would, in fact, like you to believe that it is somehow un-American to even bring it up - even though both would still try to make you believe that this country was founded as a Christian nation, and some of their supporters on the religious right would like you to believe that president Obama is insufficiently Christian, or really a Muslim.
Over at The American Prospect, Steve Erickson has put the logical sword to all of this nonsense in a very readable and coherent way. Go read it, and then ask yourself, "whose god do I want?"