The Ron Paul thread got me wondering, which would get elected first as president: A woman or an Athiest/Agnostic?
The Ron Paul thread got me wondering, which would get elected first as president: A woman or an Athiest/Agnostic?
Oh God....
A woman I think.Originally Posted by Yangsing
I wouldn't vote, but probably a woman since it's Clinton...
Owait...
Originally Posted by Izzy
A Woman would hands down. People fear the truth, or lack thereof.
*I smell a cataclysmic shit storm incoming.
?!Originally Posted by Koga
- Why do we have threads like this?
I think it would be more efficient if we just voted for the tallest candidates from now on. I mean fuck policy and charisma, he's fucking tall!
Agnostic.
A tall agnostic.
With a swimmer's body.
And power punch action to fight communism with.
FUCK YEAH! We just made the perfect president.
HURRAY FOR DEMOCRACY
An agnostic/athiest won't win in this country for a long time I imagine. The religious in this country have too good a stronghold on politics and grass-roots campaigning.
The sex stigma is so overblown anymore, it's really irrelevent
Atheist are the most distrusted minority in america (due to the overwhelming religious majority in US), but then again we all know women can't tell the truth either.
In all honesty, i beleive this country will die before we ever get lucky enough to get an openly atheist president.
There are tons of agnostics and/or morally corrupt people in office already. They just don't run on that platform, because it alienates people. Discussion moot.
Originally Posted by Alleya
Agreed, many of our founding fathers and presidents were atheistic/agnostic, but in this world/country you keep that kind of stuff to yourself.
BUT!
Who would win first, black man or white woman!?
He better be white or tan.Originally Posted by Kiro
borke