Will there be an Atheist, Female, or Homosexual President in our lifetime?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 

Female president seems the most likely of them all

an athiest president is next

but a homosexual would probably take a long time my thoughts as I bet youd get a lot of americans not wanting a homo in charge.

The Crazy Legs:

dartkun:

Jegsimmons:
nah, he'd just have to play his cards right, its totally possible, conservatives dont hate atheist....just the dawkinologist.

What?

Wait

What!?

Ok, this is the conservative Wikipedia
http://conservapedia.com/Athiesm

Tell me that the WHOLE wiki page isn't anti-athiesm?

It has connections from Atheism and Communism, Atheism and mass murder, Atheism and immoral views, Atheism, pederasty and NAMBLA, Atheism and bestiality, Atheism and rape, Atheism and evolutionary racism

SERIOUSLY.
"Atheism offers no condemnation of rape and it provides no moral basis a society to attempt to prevent and deter rape."

"Although there are recent studies relating to atheism being a causal factor for suicide for some individuals"

If you believe that Conservatives have a higher chance of electing a atheist than a liberal party. You MUST be kidding yourself. Everyone, just go read how much RIDICULOUS propaganda that site has, and then compare it to wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

*Stares, mouth wide open in shock.* Holy hell, I thought I was just kidding when I said that atheists were oppressed! Wow!

As an American from the SOUTH Let me assure you I have never met ANYONE or heard of anyone who believes ANY of that. I have met people who didn't understand athiests but NEVER anyone like that.I mean I can't speak for the entirety of the country, but thats my experience. What that guy did would be comparable to pulling up the KKK website and using it as a source for how americans feel about racial equality.

1) A female president-Within 10-20 years.
2) An Atheist president-Within 10-20 years.
3) A homosexual president-Not in my lifetime.
4) An independent (non-Republican or Democratic) president-When a new party is created that isn't a joke. Independents get so little of the vote that they won't be elected anytime soon.

Cavan:

girzwald:

Also. Why are having a gay, atheist and female presidents "accomplishments". So, until we have an atheist president in a majority religious nation.....we are incomplete? Pure stupidity. If people are supposed to be be people and everyone is supposed to be equal, then stop separating people into groups.

What you are doing is twisting meaning to say things that were not said.

What he said was about how it is not 'possible' to be an atheist president because of the current climate, and how it should be possible (note: not 'required' or 'will happen to make the country better').

What you read was some sort of implied insult about America.

Sorry, no twisting necessary. He was comparing the perceived accomplishment of overcoming of race and the election of a half black president. Then went on to ask when do people think the "accomplishment" of electing a gay, an atheist, or a woman. He wasn't listing these 3 archetypes arbitrarily, he was listing them because he equivocates NOT having a, gay, atheist, or woman president as progress not made in the course of human events and until we do, we are therefore incomplete.

And no, I did not read some sort of implied insult of America. I read stupidity on parade and exposed it.

Why not all three at once?

I think in order of liklihood it goes, female, atheist and then homosexual.

Female?

Likely, and probably soon.

Homosexual?

Maybe. Maybe by the time I'm 80 or 90.

Atheist?

Not in my lifetime. Or probably the next.

1) A female president - 5-10 years since female candidates have been gaining more and more ground, I would not be surprised if I saw a female president soon.
2) An Atheist president - 10-20 years maybe, Mitt Romney is a Mormon, which many consider to be worse than Atheist and he is the leading Republican candidate so its possible.
3) A homosexual president - Not in my lifetime, considering that in some states homosexuals aren't even given their basic rights, I doubt that there will be a homosexual president anytime soon.
4) An independent (non-Republican or Democratic) president - Never, I don't think that there ever will be a third party President, what will most likely happen is that over time the Republican party will dissolve and the Democratic party will be split into a Socialist party and a Centrist party.
5) Muslim President - When people stop using 9/11 as a curse word, I feel like this one would take the longest to achieve sole because most of America blames the entirety of the Muslim faith for 9/11.

2036
An openly gay transgender korean man (former woman, now with cyborg dick) will be elected in an unprecedented 49 state landslide (puerto rico and the canadian provinces voted republican, the mexican protectorate lost it's voting privileges for 6 years as a result of the Tijuana Rebellion) on a platform of "AK's For All!". His triumph over Archbishop Patel (who was at the time Vatican War-state ambassador to the United Continent) proved that the world had finally grown tired of this petulant cult. Shortly after taking office, he contacted our allies in the seaborne Scientologist theocratic nation, run under the dual leadership of Executive Director International Travolta, and his second in command, Mr. Cruise, and outsourced a tactical nuclear strike against the Vatican Space Citadel.

shortly afterword, the US, faced with creditors, declares war on china.

girzwald:
And no, I did not read some sort of implied insult of America. I read stupidity on parade and exposed it.

Hi, this is the OP:

Please re-read my post next time instead of skimming over it and assuming stuff, such as the big disclaimer at the front stating that these are not deciding factors in a leader (and rightfully never should be), but are cultural accomplishments from a society that generally is pretty prejudicial.

So please; drop the insults and learn to read. Then we'll all have a nice and civil internet discussion, don't you agree?

Thank you, Girzwald.

No, really, your edit is silly--who does care?

New topic: will there be a president of the United States in our life time that has less than 34 freckles, but more than 12?

Evilpigeon:
Homosexuals, atheists and women were never victims as much as black people, so it's entirely possible.

You do know gay and lesbian men and women are beaten and murdered every day, yeah? So let's not dismiss or belittle the suffering of groups, or continue comparing body-counts and bloodshed for that matter--it's horrendously insensitive to those who are actual victims.

Also, tell your average American you're gay or Atheist, and you've got a 50/50 of being ignored from that point on.

I could see a woman soon. I would like to see someone like Elizabeth Warren serve as president. Atheist? I doubt. We are considered the least trustworthy of all beliefs (or lack there of). I could see a gay president someday, but maybe in a generation or two.

Homosexuals? Doubtful, with the Christian majority in this country a politician who is openly gay would be lucky to make it to candidacy.

Women? It's a possibility, but female politicians are a somewhat scarce bunch so a lack of female president can mostly be attributed to only a handful ever having tried.

Atheists? They're in a boat that's sailing not too far behind the homosexual politicians. The Christian majority doesn't want an Atheist leader (closed minded as that thinking may be, somehow us Atheists are apparently an uneducated bunch unfit to hold power). It could happen, I just wouldn't hold your breath.

But who knows, maybe when the next election rolls around we'll get a lesbian Atheist as president.

1) A female president - not too much of a stretch to imagine it happening 10 - 20 years maybe

2) An Atheist president - I dont think it's going to happen anytime soon 40 years + probably, by the way things are going atheists seem to be finding their voice, mainly because now they are allowed to.

3) A homosexual president - anythings possible I suppose but an openly gay man running for president? He wouldnt stand a chance.

Regnes:
Well you guys elected a black man roughly 50 years after the climax of the civil rights movement. Homosexuals, atheists and women were never victims as much as black people, so it's entirely possible.

We've had atheists and women in the top position in several big name countries. Hell, Margaret Thatcher is often considered one of the greatest prime ministers ever.

You REALLY didn't just claim thatcher was one of the greatest prime ministers ever did you...

Joseph Harrison:
1)
2) An Atheist president - 10-20 years maybe, Mitt Romney is a Mormon, which many consider to be worse than Atheist and he is the leading Republican candidate so its possible.

Mormonism is gaining substantial mainstream success while atheists are still considered the least trustworthy group.

As Adam west put it "At least Muslims believe in a god, even if it is a brown smelly one."

Atheist president? I don't know.
But if my plans work a Atheist Dictator will happen 15-20 years.

Devil's Due:
How long do you believe it will take before we have...

4) An independent (non-Republican or Democratic) president

I dunno if anybody has answered this or not, but I doubt this one wil everl happen. The party system is so entrenched, that there would have to be a new organized party for a non-Democrat/Republican to win. When you look at history, with the exception of George Washington, there hasn't been a single US President who won the election, that wasn't affiliated with a Major Political party of the time[1]. It just costs too much money, and time, to run without the support of a party

[1] Well unless you count John Tyler, but the Whigs didn't elect him, and booted his ass really fast

I know it's probably been said but, Australia currently has a female, atheist prime minister.

She's shit though.

Oh and she's not married either, I dunno if that makes a difference, but she's banging out of wedlock, I assume that matters to some people.

Grey Day for Elcia:

Evilpigeon:
Homosexuals, atheists and women were never victims as much as black people, so it's entirely possible.

You do know gay and lesbian men and women are beaten and murdered every day, yeah? So let's not dismiss or belittle the suffering of groups, or continue comparing body-counts and bloodshed for that matter--it's horrendously insensitive to those who are actual victims.

Also, tell your average American you're gay or Atheist, and you've got a 50/50 of being ignored from that point on.

You quoted me with something i didnt say, what the fuck?

Pimppeter2:
Female one in the next 10-15 years
Atheist in the next 50-60

Probably wont be a homosexual one in my lifetime.

The first post, and everything I was gonna say has been said.

I think a woman president will happen soon-ish. An atheist president probably wouldn't even be nominated for the next 30-40 years, let alone win.

A homosexual president? Not for at least a century.

A homosexual women atheist? Never going to be elected.

It's always very strange to me when I hear people talk about how unlikely it is that we'll have an atheist president anytime soon. What is it about atheists (or females or homosexuals for that matter) that people don't want to vote for them?

Is it that religious people think that they'll be punished for voting for an atheist, or do they actually have a problem with the candidate?

In my (atheist) mind, having an atheist president can only mean having one that values facts and science more than others and cares about the extreme long term consequences of their actions......

It's not like the good "christian" presidents of the past led through love and forgiveness.

Jegsimmons:

no one is banning 'gays' bro. its just gay marriage.

Except for the guy who, for example, wants to "force gays back into the closet."

Fail, bro. Sorry. But on the bright side:

and to be honest, atheist have only themselves to blame for being so hated.

Yeah, by this point I'm pretty sure you're not serious.

Zachary Amaranth:

Jegsimmons:

no one is banning 'gays' bro. its just gay marriage.

Except for the guy who, for example, wants to "force gays back into the closet."

Fail, bro. Sorry. But on the bright side:

yes but no one in office is banning gays or trying to. you cant ban gays, just gay marriage.

and to be honest, atheist have only themselves to blame for being so hated.

Yeah, by this point I'm pretty sure you're not serious.

No, im totally serious, and i explained in a previous post.

A female president is definitely the most likely to happen in the upcoming election years. The Southern states will make sure that no Atheist or Gay president gets elected. In fact I imagine that in the future what will likely happen is that we will have good candidates with good plans for America who just so happen to be Atheist (and/or Gay) but will get overlooked in favor of a less qualified candidate (who is straight and Christian).
TL;DR: I can definitely see that happening, the qualified Atheist or Gay candidate will be tossed aside for an incompetent moron just because the moron happens to be straight and Christian.

Electrogecko:
Is it that religious people think that they'll be punished for voting for an atheist, or do they actually have a problem with the candidate?

Most religious folks that I have meet have been for the most part open minded, although very confused about Atheism. At least I live in one of the most tolerant states in the U.S., so thankfully it's not a big issue here. Even after being with people from very Southern states such as Alabama, even they're becoming more tolerant lately with each generation, so hopefully the rest of the States will soon become tolerant sometime within the next generation. I know many who I have talked to before that are annoyed at Atheists, but said they would vote for one if they believed he had better skills for the job at hand, even if they'd religiously have an issue with them.

However, that does not remove the fact that opponents will use the Atheism as a scare-tactic to win votes. I mean honestly, how many scare tactics did we get to elect a half-black president into office even after long abolishing slavery and three generations ago granting full rights to black citizens? Claims such as: Not having a birth certificate (Seriously?), being a Muslim during a height of Muslim scare (Terrorism, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc), and other such nonsense that was proven long ago to be false, but the average citizen believed them because of biased media corporations who took the trust of the American public and bent the words to gain votes in their favor. (I'll admit, I even believed the Muslim one for years until I did some research on my own recently, so I don't blame others for being tricked like I was.)

You can imagine how easy it'll be for them to smear that candidate.

"Citizen Joe--Godless, Soulless, Communist.
Vote for Citizen Rick today, and bring the God back to God Bless America!" (Gotta love the post-McCarthy era, eh?)

Good job, Media Corporations. You make us all look bad in the end.

*cough* Fox *cough*

Devil's Due:
snip

True enough....this is why I have an issue with our current electoral system.....on top of the fact that the dual party system is outdated, useless to begin with, and completely broken nowadays, (and don't get me started on superpac's) campaigns are always more about smearing other candidates (often without factual basis) and fear mongering than they are about any of the actual issues.

I think we really need to bring the system into the 21st century....or the 20th century for that matter. I think that, if all the candidates' opinions and policies (without any bullshit) were consolidated on an official government website and we were able to easily vote from our homes, (securely- I'm sure someone can figure it out) our country would undergo a significant shift to the left.

As it is now, candidates guzzle gas from state to state, pandering to each one independently and uniquely, and if you don't have a close personal billionaire friend, you're shit out of luck.

I could see a female easily. The other two... don't seem very likely unless some HUGE changes occur.

Teshi:
James Buchanan was gay! (At least according to Andrew Jackson. No word on whether Andrew Jackson was a douche according to James Buchanan.)

It is more than just Jackson talking about it. There is a lot of evidence that James Buchanan was a homosexual.

A lot of people believe that Abe Lincoln was an atheist. He was accused as being one when he first started to run for political office and he never denied it. He sometimes used religious sounding phrases and quoted the bible a few times but never in a way that implied the belief in a personal god of any sort. Many of Lincoln's friends had spoken about his beliefs before.

"He had no faith, in the Christian sense of the term - had faith in laws, principles, causes and effects." -David Davis
"Now let it be written in history and on Mr. Lincoln's tomb: 'He died an unbeliever.'" -William Herndon

I can definitely picture a female president within the next 20 years.

BENZOOKA:
In Finland, on the second round of the presidential elections (only a few weeks ago), with only the best two from the first round continuing:

The other contestant was homosexual. He didn't win though.

And we of course had a female president for two terms, 12 years, before this election.

Finland is just awesome like that.

OT: Hard to say. Maybe when the ideal politician stops being the white male corporate millionaire and becomes someone who represents the people's interests first. On average I don't think the rich empires of America are led by atheists, females or homosexuals.

*shrugs*

One can hope. I'm sure the electoral college is a big problem too with this. What's best for the party isn't always what's best for the people.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked