Obama Passing “No Religion” Test

Watching the Oregon returns on CNN last Tuesday night, I was intrigued by an odd statistic: among those who described … Continued

Watching the Oregon returns on CNN last Tuesday night, I was intrigued by an odd statistic: among those who described themselves as professing “no religion,” 61% cast their ballot for Senator Obama.

My curiosity piqued, I proceeded to scour Democratic exit polls to see if this was some sort of fluke. It was no fluke: of the 30 states where I could find comparable data, Obama won the “no religion” crowd an astonishing 26 times!

This pattern held in the early races where three or more candidates were on the slate. And it held in the later, head-to-head contests against Senator Clinton (though she carried them in Arkansas, Florida, Tennessee, and West Virginia).

Let’s step back for a moment. We know Obama does well among young voters. We know he does well among men. We know that affluent, well-educated whites just can’t get enough of him. My modest contribution to the Sum Total of Punditry Knowledge consists of adding that “no religion” people love the guy as well.

But who, pray tell, are the “no religion” people? This category is not exceedingly precise. After all, godless persons and deists might both be labeled as such. In fact, as I noted in my present book many pollsters fail to distinguish between atheists and agnostics (i.e., nonbelievers) on the one side, and believers who shun organized religion on the other.

In any case, Obama’s popularity among this cohort is at once baffling and understandable. It is understandable because its members tend to be younger, better educated, predominantly male, gainfully employed and overwhelmingly white.* In other words, his “no religion” supporters are an electoral Frankenstein, a conglomeration of component parts that have made up his surprising coalition.

But now we come to the baffling part. Next to Mike Huckabee, Obama has had the honor of being The Candidate Most Likely to Go Christ-y On the 2008 Electorate.

His rhetoric abounds in scriptural allusions. The cadences of the African-American Church are deliberately intoned in much of his oratory. He has publicly stated that he would like to rethink his Party’s traditional aversion to permitting religion in the public square. In short, for secularists of all stripes, Obama should trigger fight or flight responses.

But this has rarely come to pass. The secularists I speak with usually mention three arguments for ignoring his faith-based exuberance. The first–and most dubious–is that Obama is just pandering to crucial voting blocks and will regain his senses upon moving into the White House.

More plausibly, others suggest that his background as a student and scholar of constitutional law insures that he will never violate the sanctity of The Wall. Last, it is often remarked that Obama is a true liberal. Secularists, so I have been told, have little to fear from a true liberal.

Yet let us not forget that Obama is a very special type of true liberal—one that appeals to deeply religious people. Consider that in another exit poll category, “Vote by Church Attendance,” Obama has also had good state-by-state success. Those who visit their houses of worship “weekly” and “occasionally” have repeatedly given him steady support (In Oregon, for example, he scored 57% and 58% respectively with these groups).

As he tries to make inroads among White Evangelicals in the coming months it is this type of church-going voter that he must win over en masse. Of course, down at the Family Worship Center the three-headed “no religion” constituency is often seen as an elitist Frankenstein of sorts. Obama’s challenge lies in integrating both groups into his November coalition.

*****

*For a good discussion of some of these characteristics see Ariela Keysar, “Who are America’s Atheists and Agnostics?” in Secularism and Secularity: Contemporary International Perspectives, Eds. B. Kosmin and A Keysar (Hartford, CT.: Institute for the Study of Secularism in Society and Culture, 2007) pp. 33-39. Keysar bases her discussion on the 2001 American Religious Identification Survey which did draw the proper distinctions between atheists, agnostics, and those with no religion.

(For more information about religion and the candidates check out Faith 2008 by the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs.)

By Jacques Berlinerblau | 
May 22, 2008; 2:59 AM ET


Save & Share: 

 


 

<!–Twitter
 –>

 


 


 


 


 


 

Previous: Hillary’s Amazing Grace with Religious Voters |

Next: McCain’s Failed Spiritual Endorsements

<!–
Main Index –>

  • Paganplace

    I think it’s not so hard to understand, apart from the demographics: Obama’s positions on diversity, and *truly inclusive language* about belief and nonbelief are simply the most honest, comprehensive, and appealing. I think Prof. B may be leaning toward thinking the defining characteristic of non-Christians is *actually* being ‘anti-religion,’ as is so often spun. Actually, Obama speaks very well *for* those of differing beliefs or none. Remarkably, for a politician.

  • Julia

    I am a “no religion” person and I support Obama. I’m comfortable with him because I believe his churchgoing to be honest and real, not just something he does for political gain. Usually, I have one of two problems with politicians I perceive as being overly religious. First is what I’ll call the Bush Problem, which is that the politician is a true believer and wants to govern accordingly, and that terrifies me and makes me feel like that politician can’t possibly represent my interests. Second, there is what I’ll call the Kerry Problem, where I get the feeling that the politician really harbors beliefs closer to my own but puts on a show of going to church in order to compete better with those who have the Bush Problem.With Obama, I have the impression that he really does believe in his church and gets something of great personal value in going there. I do not think he’s just doing it to put on a show. It makes him seem more honest to me, and I have confidence that if he can be true to himself and a politician, then he just might be strong enough to actually lead this country in a good direction.As a secularist, I don’t mind other people being religious. I’m happy for everyone to find a right way of living. My only gripe is with those who think that they’ve found the only right way of living, but certainly not every religious person is like that. Most religious people are tolerant, and I believe that Obama is one of those. Maybe he’s just marketed himself well, but I actually do believe him.I don’t think it’s that odd that he can appeal to both secularists and regular churchgoers alike. We don’t have to be incompatible. I think religion has been used to divide the US electorate for far too long, and if he can help to heal that wound, more power to him.

  • pammy10s

    Jack: This phenomemon isn’t even a little bit baffling. Non-theists are not afraid of people who have faith. We are afraid of people who substitute faith for logic. Obama uses his faith as the basis for his moral commitments and his compassion. He does not use his faith as a reason to ignore facts, marginalize science, oppress non-believers or divide the nation along religious lines. Smart people like other smart people. Obama is a VERY smart man, and has proved it over and over again. It is also true that stupid people are intimidated by smart people. The voting results prove that out as well. Most people who have enough mental accumen to divorce themselves from the predominant paradigm are smart, intellectually curious people, and they gravitate to those they perceive to be like them. Nothing new about that. God knows we’ve suffered nearly eight years of an administration run by a certified moron, incapable of understanding complex problems, and too bull-headed and lacking in curiousity to seek out complex solutions. Obama is the anti-Bush. He is a true intellectual, and we are all grateful for it.

  • John McDaniel

    Obama appeals to secular humanists because we sense in him a rational, enlightened approach to the world and its problems; and because we also sense that his church membership started as a search for social identity and evolved into a base for both social action and political power. I don’t “believe” Obama is any more a theist than I am, and the words he used in defending himself during the Rev. Wright crisis reinforced that opinion. He strikes me as a political realist who understood early on that no one gets elected to high office in this country without professing faith in a Judeo-Christian religion.

  • E Favorite

    “In short, for secularists of all stripes, Obama should trigger fight or flight responses.”Only if you’re Prof B. wanting to be provocative, instead of straightforward about your own reasoning for choosing a President.

  • thedude

    He will have no problems. The “no religion” crowd will assume it’s pandering to win the race and won’t care. They’ve managed to ignore Obama’s increasing host of problems so far. They know that once the guy gets into office he’ll be the athiest they know and love. He’ll just convince some redneck rubes who are assuredly redneck rubes because they believe in God. In addion, the MSM (like the Post) will continue to ignore his inconsistancies and major policy gaffes. This makes ignoring his problems that much easier. The only Messiah we need is a secular one, Obama. His rhetoric is all about him.

  • Steve LOWE

    and….Don’t forget, in his book, Obama described his mom as “a lonely witness for secular humanism, a soldier for New Deal, Peace Corps, position-paper liberalism.” SECULAR HUMANISM !!! WOW ! He’s my guy !

  • outlawtorn103

    Obama uses his religion as a personal inspiration. I have no problem with that. To each their own. It’s the idea that he isn’t trying to dictate my life with his religious views (thus allowing me to my own) as to why I like him as a candidate.That in itself screams to me of what this nation is all about – many different views uniting together in a secularly established union in order to preserve one another’s freedoms – not to argue about whose is better.

  • Rob

    It’s simple. Atheists are overwhelmingly liberal. Obama is the most liberal member of the Senate. What’s left to ponder?

  • Ain’t Buying It

    Paganplace write “Obama’s positions on diversity, and ‘truly inclusive language’ about belief and nonbelif are simply teh most honest, comprehensive, and appealing.” You say what?? A man who can sit in a church pew for 20 years listening to hateful, divisive speech is neither appleaing nor inclusive. And honesty certainly seems to be lacking in Obama to say he didn’t know his pastor was preaching such divisive garbage.As for “better educated” voting for Obama — a better choice of words would be “better indoctrinated.” The public schools are doing a fine job of cranking out little robots with minds filled to capacity with liberal drivel. Is it any wonder they’re swooning and fainting at Obama’s feet like fools?

  • skeptimal

    Julia said: “I don’t think it’s that odd that he can appeal to both secularists and regular churchgoers alike…I think religion has been used to divide the US electorate for far too long, and if he can help to heal that wound, more power to him.” I agree. The fact that someone talks about religion is not a disqualifier for me, and I think most church-state separationists would agree. However, when they lose the ability to see that reasonable people of good conscience disagree with their religious views, then they’ve become a danger to democracy (and civilization).

  • Hello Prof. Berlinerblau

    I think your puzzlement is justified. He puzzles me lots, and I am what you would call an “evangelical Christian” (agreeing with the Manifesto you talked about). I am also puzzled by my own reactions to him. He is very attractive because he is a real thinker. But I don’t think his true colors will show until he gets into action. After all, what he will do would be the true test, wouldn’t it? I think many people are very curious about that, and they are willing to stake more than they admit to see what will happen.

  • outlawtorn103

    Ain’t Buying It, I ain’t buying you. Have you noticed so far that the only people out there calling Rev. Wright’s sermons ‘hateful, divisive speech’ are the ultra-conservative parrots of right-wing talk radio, and those uneducated and/or ignorant of American history? To those who bother to look a little deeper, beyond the info-tainment level of sound bites and paid-to-argue pundits, to the full scope of Wright’s sermons, you realize he doesn’t make any hateful comments at all, especially when you compare him to the vitriolic ‘hate-America’ diatribes of evangelical ‘heroes’ like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.And how are public schools so liberal? Isn’t the curriculum determined by the government? The same government that has been so overwhelmingly conservative the past 7 years?You sound like you’d accuse the educated of being ‘indoctrinated’ to the ‘distortion’ of the scientific method. Educated people are more likely to know more about the world around them, know that those with different points of view are still human and deserving of respect, are more likely to know history and to pay attention to current events and relate them back to history, and therefore more likely to understand where another’s view is coming from — in the end making that person more likely to be liberal than not.Our school system is not ‘hijacked’ by a bunch of liberals looking to zombify our children. The school system is run by hard-working people on both sides of politics determined to give children a decent, competetive education – an education with a side-effect of unlocking a child’s imagination and empathy for fellow man. The happy side-effect of being educated is becoming enlightened and the closest political equivalent is liberalism.

  • FRIEND

    Let’s vote for a true progressive who has fought injustice for many years:www.votenader.org

  • Julia

    Yeah, Ain’t Buying It:

  • L.Kurt Engelhart

    John McDaniel: We might conclude from this evidence that secular beliefs constitute a religion that transcends recognized, organized religions. Secular beliefs are not closed-ended, making it possible to say that they are “scientific,” and that they are allowed to evolve on a democratic basis, in other words supported by government. Secular beliefs do not deny the existence of other beliefs, but they intend to integrate them all in a way that best supports the society.

  • Reason

    To Julia, who says she’s a “no religion” person, I’d like to know — who decides what is true, what is not true? You say Obama seems “honest” to you. What is the definition of honest? And you say you believe he’ll lead our country in a “good” direction. What is “good”? Who determines the meaning of these words?

  • Fred

    Yeah, Reason, I second that. I might not want the country to go in the “good” direction Julia’s talking about. And I might not want the “change” Obama’s talking about….or maybe what Obama means by “change” is that HE is ever changing. One day Rev. Wright’s his “uncle,” the next he’s “no longer my pastor.” One day he’s friends with Bill Ayers, the next he just happens to live on the same street. Hmmm…

  • Ain’t Buying It

    Another thing I’m not buying is that Obama is a Christian. Athiests & Agnostics apparently aren’t either; that’s what they like about him. Even Obama’s own pastor made it clear that Obama’s just “being a politician” (lying), willing to say anything to get elected.

  • Fred

    …One day Obama’s a faithful church-goer, the next he’s never heard Wright’s sermons….One day he’s willing to sit down and talk with some of the world’s worst dictators, the next he’s only willing to talk to them under certain conditions….One day he’s against NAFTA, the next he has aides telling Canadian officials he’s for it.Change, folks!

  • B-man

    Non-believers like myself love Obama because he is the only famous Christian who seems genuinely intelligent and rational. He is comfortable with his faith but doesn’t see the need to foist it on anyone else, in his private or public life. I’ve long said that I really don’t have anything against Christians, as long as they keep their religion in their homes and churches, and keep it out of our science, our politics, and our children’s classrooms. I trust Obama to do that.

  • Reason

    Hey, B-Man,You say you’re a “non-believer” — does that mean you don’t believe in anything? Surely there’s something you believe in, right?

  • B-man

    I’m a Buddhist, so I don’t believe in vengeful deities. I do believe in having compassion for all living beings, and in the worthiness of pursuing personal enlightenment.

  • Garyd

    Now all you need is a majority of the other 80% of the country. People who are almost all left of center favoring the most leftist candidate in the field shouldn’t come as a big shock to much of anyone.

  • Reason

    B-Man,Exactly what do you mean by “vengeful deities”?

  • B-man

    The Gods in the three Abrahamic traditions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

  • reason

    B-Man,If one human harms another human, are both to be treated equally compassionatly? Would punishing the perpetrator be seen as vengeance to you?

  • B-man

    Yes. All beings are to be treated with equal compassion. I don’t believe “punishing” a perpetrator gets anyone anything but an ego-based sense of revenge, and over-crowded prisons. “Treating” the perpetrator for whatever sickness caused him to act in an unethical way would be more appropriate.

  • reason

    B-Man,How is not punishing a person for a crime being compassionate to the victim? Is there no justice in your faith?

  • B-man

    Punishing a perpetrator has nothing to do with showing compassion to a victim. You may recall the gunman that shot up an Amish schoolhouse a while back. The Amish immediately forgave him and showed great compassion for his family.

  • reason

    So then, B-Man, do you find the Amish faith to be commendable?

  • B-man

    I found their response to that tragedy to be quite enlightened.

  • Jordan Alexander Orosz

    NOW I LAY ME DOWN TO SLEEP…I awoke to hear how statesmanlike Barack Hussein Obama’s speech had inspired the mainstream media to restate some of his eloquent passages. Sundry pundits and parroting-press idolaters repeated the effect of Obama’s answer to racial and religious attention. I viewed several of his television appearances and noted his uplifted face and far-out gaze. I was impressed, and then it hit me.

  • daro borges

    ummmm…aren’t Christians called CHRISTians beccause they believe Jesus is more than just a prophet, like Moses, but rather the INCARNATION of God on earth?? or do you believe that Jesus was actually God’s “son”…didnt the real Jesus have four brothers? so, according to this “real” Christian… CHRISTians are not supposed to pray to CHRIST, but it’s ok to pray “in his name”? huh? so if you direct a prayer to Jesus, God wont anwser it? The Creator of the universe doesnt have some sort of call-forwarding? He has a different in-box? ayayay This is what happens when humans try to name (and therefore define and limit) that which is essentially infinite….no wonder so many people are ditching religion and instead just trying to focus on “doing unto others”…all this legalistic stuff is so archaic and confusing and unnecessary! leave it to RELIGION to impel a CHRISTian to complain about people focusing too much on CHRIST! Jesus, will you please tell God, I need an aspirin. Your followers are giving me a headache.

  • Athena

    I might just be an ignorant former-Catholic-turned-Pagan, but didn’t Jesus say, “I and the Father are one?” Silly Christians, nitpicking on everything. If someone doesn’t belong to the same Church that you go to, or do things in exactly the same way that you do, they’re “not a Christian”. Puh-leeze. While I’m not an expert in the United Church of Christ (you’d have to ask Rev. Willis this), but I’m pretty sure that if it’s the “Church of Christ” they’re going to pray to Jesus.

  • Athena

    Excuse me, I meant Dr. Willis Elliott. This is what I get when I post before finishing my coffee. 😀

  • John McDaniel

    Daro Borges: GREAT post!Jordan… Jordan…”early churches…were inventing religious diversions and essentially ‘getting it wrong.'”Sorry, but this describes ALL religions. As for the rest of your post, as Christopher Hitchens would say: “White noise.”

  • Anonymous

    Don’t know why I’m posting here. Maybe its because I like the company of atheists. Maybe its because religion makes me want to gag. maybe its because I got nothing else to do since my christian wife died an agonizing death in my arms just 23 days ago.Yeah she believed. A lot of good it did her. She would read her bible.She new she was dying. She hoped God would take her quietly. I hoped so too.But no. He dragged the agony out as long as he could. It went on and on and on and on, til when she went I was glad. I was glad. I thought about putting a bullet in her head. I thought about it seriously. I even got the gun and put it on the table and stared at it for long periods of time. But then I put it away and hated myself for thinking like that.I never told her I didn’t believe in God. She knew I wasn’t big on religion, and I only mentioned God when I was swearing. But if there is a God I hate him. Especially since he wouldn’t even help her not even a little bit. he never even lifted a finger.So don’t tell me theres a god. That is a load of bull. But for my wife, just being dead is heaven. Heaven is nothingness. And it’s heaven for me too that she’s nowhere, and feeling no pain.I have to go

  • spiderman2

    I hope anonymous can read this. Life is really not fair and the Lord showed it by sacrificing himself on the cross. He spent his life here on earth not as a rich fellow but one who suffered so people cannot accuse Him that it isn’t fair. It’s the afterlife where He can show his true love. No more suffering and no more pain. Your wife I believe is enjoying her life now. It’s you who is her problem. If you continue with your unbelief, it will lead you to more despair and most of all eternal damnation. Everybody suffers. That is life. But all suffering on earth has an ending. Look at it this way. Would you rather be the rich man who went to hell than poor Lazarus who went to Heaven? If you can only picture what true hell is, you would say that your wife could be the luckiest person alive. Her faith would save her from the flame. All that I’ve said will happen. It’s the truth. WW3 is just around the corner. Many people will suffer. But it’s nothing compared to the afterlife. Just believe and you’ll be safe. Cling to the faith just as your wife did. She’s one fortunate women compare to the atheist crowd here. These people are all burning sooner or later. Your wife is in a very happy place now. Believe it. I too suffered before I saw the light. Let that sad experience guide you to where the light is.

  • Dolph T

    I am one of the No-God-Squad and don’t find it odd that others like me voted for Obama (as did I). I think that the correlation you will find that holds up is level of education — the more educated you are the more likely you are to be a member of the No-God-Squad and the more likely you are to vote for the more intelligent, more rational candidate and that is surely Obama. Long ago, I was a market research analyst for a camera company and we discovered (in a pre-digital camera age) that ownership of a 35 mm camera, or the desire to purchase one, went up with every year of education and that no other variable mattered (even though there was a slight correlation with income because the more educated tend to make more money). Once you had more than a college degree there was almost no chance that you wanted any other type of camera than a 35 mm. Obama is this year’s 35mm camera — every year of education you have will increase the likelihood that you are an Obama supporter. Perhaps it’s because he’s more substance than style and doesn’t speak down to his audience. Maybe that will wind up hurting him, but if not, we will wind up with the most intelligent, rational and ethical President that we’ve had in a long long time.

  • John McDaniel

    Anonymous: I am very sorry for your loss. I hope you find peace. The only advice I can offer is to find a way to help others, since it is in helping others that we experience the greatest joy.I put my big question about life to my son the pediatrician. Dr. Vonnegut said this to his doddering old dad: “Father, we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is.” — Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without A CountrySpiderman2: You should have stopped with “Life is really not fair…” “It’s the afterlife where He can show his true love.”Huh? Where he “can” show his true love? What sort of god would have us suffer in life because he “can’t” show us his true love? A sadistic monster! Given all the pain and injustice in this world, I hope there ISN’T a god. I’m not just atheist, I’m anti-theist.”If you continue with your unbelief, it will lead you to more despair and most of all eternal damnation.”If your coping mechanism is to believe in a wonderful afterlife, then I wish you well in your comforting delusion, but PLEASE, Christians, STOP TRYING TO SCARE freethinkers into joining you!

  • Jude

    Obama is the religion for the non-religious. It’s simple – he is their Messiah, and their opiate.

  • Fallon Phanord

    1 Samuel 8:1-9God never intended people to rule over people. He was always meant to be the one leading His people. The above scripture talks about ancient Israel and the Israelites. But the same carries weight with spiritual Israel, which are those called out of the world (Egypt) and are being led by the Holy Spirit (fire and cloud) into rest from their own works for righteousness (promise land). While we live in the world, Christians, we should no longer be apart of this world and reject all their practices (Romans 12:1). Our leader is Christ (1 Corinthians 11:3) and no man is in authority over us. Let God lead you. Don’t chance after anyone else. ONLY GOD!! Be led by the Spirit of God so you can fulfill what God desires for you: “For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy”- Leviticus 11:44.God bless.

  • faithfulservant3

    Jacques:I find your use of the term “secularist” somewhat curious.Perhaps there is a new movement or seminal study that has introduced this terminology into the lexicon in the few decades that I have been out of college.I began truly believing in God about 6 years ago. Before that time I usually considered myself an agnostic. There’s a little more to it than not believing in “organized religion.”I also considered myself liberal or progressive. I believed in the “wall” as you put it but I thought that its philosophical and practical underpinnings were weak; and that both sides in the debate made much too much of it.I’m not sure I know what a “secularist” is or why it’s supposed to be a good thing. Even before I had faith I admired Christians because most are people of strong principle.Far from being agnostics or “secularists,” these “no religion” people are probably people like I was who haven’t quite decided yet. Maybe they haven’t figured out who they want to be yet, or maybe they’re still doing research.I imagine that most would call themselves “spiritual.” Spiritual people admire the faith of others if it’s sincere–this is why they give Obama the benefit of the doubt.

  • B-man

    Dolph T has it right. The well-educated, well-read, world-traveled section of our electorate loves Obama because they know the real deal when they see it–a mature, intelligent, rational, visionary leader. (And, BTW, Obama has as much experience as Abraham Lincoln did when he became president.)The back-assward conservative redneck hillbilly’s of this country loved George W Bush because they are basically uneducated, naive, and gullible, and have little real-world experience outside the sparsely-populated rural area in which they grew up.And if there’s a bigger pandering, flip-flopping, lying, George-Bush-clone than John McCain, I haven’t seen him. McCain is no moderate. He will be even worse than Dubya.

  • Lu Franklin

    The bottom line:

  • JoeOD

    I am on the same path as Julia, above. Maybe the younger, better-educated, “no-god” folks accept Obama because they are tolerant of differing beliefs. Maybe they will accept someone who is truly religious because they value the spiritual side of life even if they don’t share the particular approach. Maybe they recognize the great traditions and moral teachings of religion while rejecting the structures and catechism.Maybe Obama is for real, and these people are just recognizing it.

  • Rick Wingrove

    As an Atheist and an Obama supporter, I can explain the unlikely attraction.

  • wogieta

    To Jordan Alexander Orosz: Since when do Christians not pray to Jesus? That prayer you started your post with, the one that goes “Now I lay me down to sleep” goes something like this:Now I lay me down to sleepNow there is a darker version that ends with “If I should die before I wake, I pray the LORD my soul to take”, but I think it is rather scary for children, and I think my parents did too, which is why they taught me the first version when I was very small. As a devout and well educated (BA and a master’s) Christian (my father is a pastor), I’ve been praying this and other prayers to Jesus and God my entire life. Both the Nicene and Apostle’s Creeds, used in many Protestant faiths and, I believe, the Roman Catholic faith, are both very prayer-like and refer to God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Most importantly, as another poster stated, Jesus was God’s presence on Earth. Are the two really seperate?To say that Obama is lying and/or pandering because he prays to Jesus is rather far fetched and outlandish. There are a lot of misperceptions out there about him, especially concerning his faith, that people might use as the sole reason to vote against him. Given that, why shouldn’t he talk about his faith if he wants to, if that is what it takes to correct the misperceptions that people have about him because of the rumors and distortions that circulate about him. Like several of the other posters, I don’t mind when a candidate for office talks about their faith. But what I do mind, even as a practicing Christian, is when they announce plans to legislate their religious beliefs, imposing their faith on their consituency.

  • wogieta

    To Jordan Alexander Orosz: Since when do Christians not pray to Jesus? That prayer you started your post with, the one that goes “Now I lay me down to sleep” goes something like this:Now I lay me down to sleepNow there is a darker version that ends with “If I should die before I wake, I pray the LORD my soul to take”, but I think it is rather scary for children, and I think my parents did too, which is why they taught me the first version when I was very small. As a devout and well educated (BA and a master’s) Christian (my father is a pastor), I’ve been praying this and other prayers to Jesus and God my entire life. Both the Nicene and Apostle’s Creeds, used in many Protestant faiths and, I believe, the Roman Catholic faith, are both very prayer-like and refer to God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Most importantly, as another poster stated, Jesus was God’s presence on Earth. Are the two really seperate?To say that Obama is lying and/or pandering because he prays to Jesus is rather far fetched and outlandish. There are a lot of misperceptions out there about him, especially concerning his faith, that people might use as the sole reason to vote against him. Given that, why shouldn’t he talk about his faith if he wants to, if that is what it takes to correct the misperceptions that people have about him because of the rumors and distortions that circulate about him. Like several of the other posters, I don’t mind when a candidate for office talks about their faith. But what I do mind, even as a practicing Christian, is when they announce plans to legislate their religious beliefs, imposing their faith on their consituency.

  • Lynn E

    Obama even states that what attracted him to his church was Black Liberation Theology. It is very close to Marxism and it has been closely connected to in Latin America as Liberation Theology. While most secularists have nothing to do with Marxism, Obama has had quite a bit to do with it. Many secularists from the left recognize Obama’s roots and beliefs. That is one reason academics feel comfortable with him, they feel the same way. Students are often steeped in these beliefs for the first time in college and many have gone high over heels for Obama. I had one of my former students come home from Freshman year at college telling me that violent change in destroy the infrastructure is the best way so that the old ways don’t grow back. He is Obama crazy and knows the leftist slants. What this kid doesn’t get is the reality of the situation where people get killed and destroyed. He is definitely against the Iraq War but doesn’t equate the destruction of the infrastructure there with the problems with creating a new country “from the ground up” with what he proposes from a leftist point of view, he’s too young and hasn’t had the years and life experience to process what he’s learned. He still can vote. I also heard a speaker on Point of Inquiry, a podcast promoting among other things, secular humanism, back in February state that he believed that enticing the people with secularism and offering them something in place of religion was something very good. He stated it had to be done very quietly and nicely or people might get mad and fight back. The man was a strong supporter of Barack Obama and seemed to think that Obama was the guy to bring these plans into reality. The man was countering an interview the podcast had with Richard Dawkins the week before. Dawkins believed that secular humanists should just come out and state their beliefs clearly and stop hiding or being quiet about their ideas.

  • Lynn E

    Obama even states that what attracted him to his church was Black Liberation Theology. It is very close to Marxism and it has been closely connected to in Latin America as Liberation Theology. While most secularists have nothing to do with Marxism, Obama has had quite a bit to do with it. Many secularists from the left recognize Obama’s roots and beliefs. That is one reason academics feel comfortable with him, they feel the same way. Students are often steeped in these beliefs for the first time in college and many have gone high over heels for Obama. I had one of my former students come home from Freshman year at college telling me that violent change in destroy the infrastructure is the best way so that the old ways don’t grow back. He is Obama crazy and knows the leftist slants. What this kid doesn’t get is the reality of the situation where people get killed and destroyed. He is definitely against the Iraq War but doesn’t equate the destruction of the infrastructure there with the problems with creating a new country “from the ground up” with what he proposes from a leftist point of view, he’s too young and hasn’t had the years and life experience to process what he’s learned. He still can vote. I also heard a speaker on Point of Inquiry, a podcast promoting among other things, secular humanism, back in February state that he believed that enticing the people with secularism and offering them something in place of religion was something very good. He stated it had to be done very quietly and nicely or people might get mad and fight back. The man was a strong supporter of Barack Obama and seemed to think that Obama was the guy to bring these plans into reality. The man was countering an interview the podcast had with Richard Dawkins the week before. Dawkins believed that secular humanists should just come out and state their beliefs clearly and stop hiding or being quiet about their ideas.

  • JBE

    Athiests and agnostics distrust religious leaders who combine their politics with the pulpit because such people are proven hypocrites.Barack Obama is the polar opposite!Again, and again, and again, outwardly political religious figures, and outwardly religious politicians, get caught red handed in a persuit of money, sex, drugs, real estate, and personal privelege, and personality cults.The way to catch a crooked Pastor, Rabbi, or Imam is to listen when they talk politics. Our current administration and Pentagon are thick and rotten with them.Non-religious people vote for Obama because he is obviously NOT one of them.Vote Obama in ’08!

  • JBE

    Athiests and agnostics distrust religious leaders who combine their politics with the pulpit because such people are proven hypocrites.Barack Obama is the polar opposite!Again, and again, and again, outwardly political religious figures, and outwardly religious politicians, get caught red handed in a persuit of money, sex, drugs, real estate, and personal privelege, and personality cults.The way to catch a crooked Pastor, Rabbi, or Imam is to listen when they talk politics. Our current administration and Pentagon are thick and rotten with them.Non-religious people vote for Obama because he is obviously NOT one of them.Vote Obama in ’08!

  • NoReligion

    We non-religious are used to making judgements based on our own observations and research, rather than sucking up what we’re told. This method of decision making apparently favors Obama.

  • Jay

    We religious are used to making judgements based on our own observations and research, rather than sucking up what we’re told, and we also use logic that is more rational than many non-religous.The above statement sound ridiculous? About just as ridiculous as saying that the same thing applies to non-religous people. We accept the fact that we have problems and understand that we, just like the other side, are often hypocritical as well. Both sides make presuppositions that lead to the decisions they make. I’m presupposing that Obama is just another politician, meaning he probably lies to get elected and probably isn’t really a Christian.Let’s say I’m wrong, Obama is somehow special and better than other politicians (don’t get me wrong I already like him more the McCain, and Hilary.). That means he isn’t lying and he is actually a Christian. Therefore he believes Christ is God, and is going to return to Earth someday. That means he will probably make decisions that will favor Christianity since it is true to him, and in that case I want him to be our next president.If Obama is as pure and good as all of you seem to say, I want him for president as well, because he will do great for the Christian cause. I bet as soon as he gets in office he shows how religious he really is. He won’t allow Evolution to be taught in schools, he will strip gays of all their rights, he’ll make abortions illegal in all circumstances. GO OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!OBAMA the fighter for religion.Just joking i’m not voting for him I can’t stand religion all by itself, it means nothing without love.

  • jjb

    Technically, Obama is a Muslim, at least to any person of the Muslim faith. Any child born to a Muslim father is Muslim forever. Since Obama changed to the Christian church, he is considered in apostasy and should be scorned or worse by those of his father’s faith. He will then never be accepted by any leader of a Muslim country so he can forget about working out anything with peoples in the Middle East…not that most voters care one way or another, apparently. Maybe the Democratic Party as well as Obama, the favorite, are just suffering from some sort of death wish.

  • Voice of Reason

    So… Obama scores 61% of people who do not consider themselves a member of a specific faith and 57-58% of people who do. So what exactly was the point, other than to characterize “younger, better educated, predominantly male, gainfully employed and overwhelmingly white” voters as an “elitist Frankenstein”?Elitism is the “consciousness of or pride in being a member of a special or selected group.” Religion is the ultimate elitism. Each faith claims that they are the only true religion and all who fail to adhere to their specific rules or rituals are doomed to eternal damnation.You can’t get more elitist than that.

  • B-man

    Jay:Ultimately, if you are a Christian, that means you believe in a fantastical story, a story which has a talking snake, a person turning into a pillar of salt, a man who lived to be almost a thousand years old, Jesus rising off the earth and floating into the sky, a world which has existed for only 6,000 years, etc, etc, etc. ad nauseum.Trying to claim that you use *logic* just as secular people do is pretty far-fetched, I’d go so far as to say laughable, when you believe in, organize your life around, and indoctrinate your children in, these bronze-age fairy tales.

  • longtimewatcher

    I find it refreshing to see a presidential candidate who seems to actually try to do the two things Jesus taught: love others and protect the poor.I surely don’t remember him telling us to judge others or attack those who have not attacked us. This was never the time to torture, and despite former Sen. Rick Santorum saying that the problem with the left is they are too tolerant, it would seem self-evident that if we are all going to get along on the earth, tolerance must be a virtue.Obama is tolerant. I LIKE that, although I find it strange to have to defend being nice to people when having discussions with “Christians.”

  • Garyd

    Get real Atheists are on average no smarter and no better traveled and have no greater understanding of the world or anything else than your average Christian or Jew or Muslim at least as far as the US is concerned. Atheists are at least as guilty of buying into various mythologies namely communism and socialism as any religionist. Communism founders upon one great paradox namely that you can’t make any kind of reasonable attempts at the Marxian ideal from each according to his means to each according to his needs without a large and intrusive government to ascertain exactly what those means and needs are.Socialism upon the fact that buy the time you have such a government in place your ability to meet anyones needs other than those of the bureaucrats staffing said government is extremely limited.By the time You add State local and county governments to the total we are likely spending on the order of 5 to six trillion dollars on government in this country the majority of which is directed either primarily or secondarily toward poverty relief. That’s close to half the GDP of the entire country and frankly I see no evidence that the poor are any better off now than they were in 1964 when LBJ was elected and everyone else’s life is greatly constrained.

  • Paganplace

    Garyd:Just cause some capitalist Christians like to call ‘socialism’ Godless doesn’t mean it is. A bigger percentage of atheists out there are in fact better-educated and better-travelled. This is cause of the anti-intellectualism of certain religions, as well as totalitarian regimes. Frankly, the *coupling* of religion and politics in certain anti-intellectual ways is a hallmark of tyrranny, whether in the name of a God or a state. The Nazi Party you like to bring up, but forget, ran on a ‘Christian Values,’ book-burning-anti-gay platform. ‘National Socialism’ wasn’t ‘socialism’ in the sense you like to refer to when it came to something like universal health care: it was about conflating the state with corporate interests and expecting the people to toe that line.

  • B-man

    GARYD:I think you are guilty of wishful thinking. There have been many studies done in the past that show Democrats are more educated as a whole.Here’s just one example: Also, if you look at the primary results, even in Red states, the metropolitan areas usually go Blue, where the more educated people live.The fly-over states in this country, where people are demonstrably less educated, are mostly filled with creationist hicks, like Mike Huckabee, McCain’s likely choice for VP.

  • Chip

    “as I noted in my present book many pollsters fail to distinguish between atheists and agnostics”Jacques, I always enjoy your essays and analysis, but I have to take issue with the above. There is no difference between atheists and agnostics. Almost all atheists are agnostics who simply don’t play semantic games to dodge the wrath of the religious. The only atheists who aren’t agnostic are those who claim to have direct knowledge that there is no god or gods. Since it would require both omnipresence and omniscience to make that claim I’ve never heard a rationalist make it. Huxley didn’t coin the term agnostic until 1869 and it wasn’t meant to denote something separate from atheism but to be more descriptive and to avoid the stigma. It’s purely semantic. If you’re not a theist, you’re an atheist. Agnostics aren’t theists, ergo they’re atheists.

  • Chaotician

    To be honest, I support Obama in spite of his religion and more importantly, his support of Israel! It is extremely difficult to have any confidence in someones reasoning ability when so much thinking is discarded and replaced with childhood superstitions, heavily redacted spiritual essays from 2000 years of obvious pandering writings, and worse his support of a murderous once upon a time midlle east tribal culture whoes only claim to fame is a persitent belief in a God they have not heard from for more than 2500 years!Of course, one needs to compare him to Pappy, who will believe whatever you want this week and something totally different next week as long as the brain dead Christians will vote for him to bring the US back to the medieval level of the crusades, pogoms, and that ever popular burning of those witches at the stake. He is a clear favorite in this contest!

  • Anonymous

    Religious indoctrination trumps brains and education.

  • spiderman2

    Justin wrote “Religion makes no sense. There is no reason to believe in gods”It’s true that there are false religions but to conclude that there is no God is equally foolish.HOW DID SOIL TURN TO BRAIN?That is the question atheists should be busy about.While tackling it, proceed to another question HOW DID SOIL LEARN TO BREATH ?

  • spiderman2

    I hope I get good answers so I can use it for my upcoming book “The Book of Idiots : Look Ma, No Brains”. Hopefully, it would be published next year.

  • Peter E Dant

    Nothing to do with politics – simply that calling a group of voters a “Frankenstein” is meaningless in this context. Frankenstein was the Mad Scientist who created a monster – the stated context of “an electoral Frankenstein, a conglomeration of component parts ” should refer to Frankenstein’s MONSTER.Oh yeah, I know that this is a commonly made mistake, but an academic should do better and not simply run with the common herd.

  • Black Saint

    The problem Obama has with white uneducated voters is they never had the fine points of race and racism explained to them by learned professors. Not having a higher education to reply upon they must substitute common sense. 1.They have a very hard time understanding how anyone with any intelligence can sit in a Church for 20 years and support ones friend and mentor week after week, month after month, year after year with your money, family and attendance while listening to Hate American, Hate whites, Hate every thing rants, (with the exception of Blacks and Muslins) and still insist that he has not endorsed and does not believe in the Message, and he has not endorsed and does not believe in the MESSENGER.

  • Anonymous

    With the nutty way the USA selects Presidents, Obama is my preference of the choices. My hope is that Obama is effective at hiring good people to the jobs that need to be done and provides them what they need to do their jobs, that he believes in accountability, that he believes in investing rather than reacting .. oh, and that he can keep church and state separate.W

  • R.S.Newark

    What the “pollesters fail to understand is the overlap among the categories of voters they ficticiously pretend to describe as exclusive and singular. Of the “no religious belief” crowd I could easily imagine that 85% are in the “white, educated” group as well. These categories have no meaning until they are truly singular and excluding by group. That old saying; “figures don’t lie” needs the caveat “but liers can figure”.

  • Agki Strodon

    Jeeeesus, Jacques, you don’t seem to have much of a hold on the “non-religious” and Obama. It doesn’t have much to do with religion at all. I support Senator Obama because he demonstrates the values of equality and fairness far more than Clinton or McCain. Both are panderers to lobbyists and other Big Money interests and neither will talk to Iran. McCain also panders to every rightwing “cause” out there, from “Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” militarism, Blackwater, and anti-mortgage relief to Rod Parsley, John Hagee, and every other pseudoreligious, pseudoChristian attemppt to transform this secular nation into a theocracy. Religion is only peripherally involved in it. If we seek a president who is dedicated to the Constitution, liberal principles, and presents the least danger to us as a secular nation, Obama is the best of the three.

  • James

    The nonreligious voters are probably more tolerant than the religious voters. Obama with all his distractions of race, religion (which one?), elitism etc. has scared away many intolerant voters who would probably agree with his policies. The key word to answer your question is tolerance. Religious people tend to have less of this. If Obama did worship at a Mosque, would USAn’s support him as much as they do now?

  • lisa

    my boyfriend all said ‘ can you put a so -call blackman in the white house’ we are black. you people have gone totally mad i thought we in jamaica where stupid by electing a lunatic name portia simpsom-miller as prime minister. which prove to be a complete disaster now american join the party of electing lunatic to lead. by the if obama is elected he wont be the worst president money can buy. ya’ll thought bush was a damm fool you just wait. i hope ray stevens will have a song for this nation under obama leadership.

  • epthorn

    uh, well, you know it’s possible that “affluent, well-educated whites” are also more likely to be non-theist; in that case, it’s a coincidence in a sense. In other words that correlation doesn’t mean there’s any real causation.

  • lisa

    with the exception of barbados could someone tell me which country where a blackman is the leader is striving economically, politically and socially please.

  • boris kravitz

    Anyone,including Obama, with a high level of intelligence and knowledge will be agnostic, if not atheistic.For practical purposes a politician

  • hilary

    I am an Atheist & an Obama Supporter. One of the reasons I first liked Obama is that I heard him say in a speech something like “people of all faiths and those of no faith” (not an actual quote) and it was the first time I ever heard a politician acknowledge atheists…they always say the people of all faiths part (though most mean Christians of all denominations) but they never include the secularists/atheists/agnostics. I believe Obama is a serious Christian but I believe he is respectful of those of us without faith & that is a rare thing in American politics.

  • Tom McMahon

    As one of the godless people, people must understand that being non religious is not saying we don’t believe in a higher power. Everything we are is present through the galaxies so we are all in part made from the same cloth so to speak. WE do not however believe in any type of devine intervention, just as we do not pray to a god for there will never be an answer forthcoming. If any person ever claimed to have had a god speak to them we would confine them to an institution or tell them they need to see a psychiatrist. I have asked many people who are religious if god ever answeredthem and all of the answers were the same, NO.

  • Terra Gazelle

    I am a Pagan and an Obama supporter. I first heard of Obama at the 2004 Democratic Convention…at the end of his KeyNote speech I was standing, applauding with tears raining down my cheeks. he said what I yerned for…I have been paying attention to this funny/handsome looking man. He is amazing and complex, something we are not used to. We are used to two dimentional men…bumper sticker speeches and dumbing down thinking. As far as his church. Anyone have an idea how far Springfield (capitol of Ill) is from Chicago? 200 miles. Now I know alot of folks love their church, but how many will travel 400 miles each Sunday and maybe Wednesday each week? He was in the State Senate you know, in Springfield. Can you Church goers tell me if you have to believe every word your pastor says? Do any of you that are going into Black Liberation Theology know what it is? From the words of it’s founder:If people are going to be against something or someone at least try to understand the truth of it. Honor and honesty calls for it.

  • Terra Gazelle

    lisa,terra

  • Christian

    “And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.” Luke 17:26-30

  • Christian

    And as for Obama being a Christian, I think that’s great. However, I don’t understand how he could listen to a pastor who said the things Rev. Wright said. There is no racism in true Christianity. We are all of one race — the human race. We are all descendants of Adam and Eve, therefore there are no separate “races.” The sooner we come to understand that, the sooner we will be able to rid society of horribly hateful racism.

  • Arminius

    Hi, Terra, Two good posts there, keep it up.You may remember that I also support Obama. I got converted by his race speech. The minute it ended, I got on his web site and donated money, even though I am unemployed. I remember every president from Truman on, and Obama is the only one I have ever given money to.Arminius

  • Dolores Hajra

    I am fortunate enough to have worked with Barack Obama for two years, while he was an editor, then President, of the Harvard Law Review. I found him to be brilliant, kind, and authentic then, as now. So I am admittedly prejudiced in favor of and strongly supportive of his candidacy.That said, it’s easy to answer the question of why we “no religions” are supportive of Barack. It’s the same reason I had no problem with Jimmy Carter, who was likely one of the most religious of our recent presidents. Neither Jimmy Carter nor Barack Obama feels the need to cram his own religious beliefs down our throats or use these beliefs as a reason to set public policy.Unlike the current Administration, which is a tool of the Christian conservatives, the Carter administration believed in a clear separation of church and state, as will an Obama administration.

  • K.F.

    The most compelling argument a non-religious person can make for trusting Obama despite his religiosity is that he subscribes to the most reasonable version of religion, the one that admits doubt. He does not believe God wants him to be president, and he does not claim that God will guide his hand. He may believe in something that many of us find implausible, but he makes his decisions based on something we can all agree on: human reason.

  • Athena DragonDancer

    One must take into consideration the fact that being labeled “no religion” does not necessarily mean that the person is not religious. That term unfortunately also lumps together not just agnostics, atheists, and those allergic to organized religion, but also secular humanists, Wiccans, Pagans, and others who get thrown in there by computer systems or surveys that have no space where one can mark such beliefs. It’s unfortunate that in this day and age of such religious diversity there are demographic labels that are still so limited in scope. That does not mean that people are voting for Obama simply on basis of religious belief. Perhaps they are voting because he doesn’t shove his religion in their face, or perhaps he shares their stance on the issues (there are still people that choose a candidate based on the issues!), perhaps they feel he is the best of the bunch and most likely to change this country for the better, and there are plenty of other reasons that people here have written in why Obama has their vote. There is no one firm answer, just like there is no one religion in this country. The voters’ reasons, like their religious beliefs, reflect the diversity of this great nation.

  • Hobbs

    Senator Obama strongly believes in the separation of church and state. He has given a great speech on this. Check out his views on this in the Faith section of his website:

  • barb

    The people that loudly declare how religious they are usually the least christian.

  • w05

    Wait a second… Obama won the Oregon primary 59-41, and he won the no-religion vote 61-39. You found that two-percent difference significant?

  • Obama Well Wisher

    Given Senator Obama has all but won the Democratic nomination, Obama – Clinton would make a great team. Opportunity for triple history to be made: First black president, first woman vice-president teamed with former President. Vision and experience makes a good marriage.

  • Dennis

    Another term for “no religion” is “intelligent and educated”

  • Marcia D Judkins

    We the church -the body of Christ, can not and should not condemn a man for what he thinks; but should bring him to the truth. The Lord has the ear of Obama. He prays to Jesus Christ, which happens to be a fundamental reason i am voting for him.

  • SteveCO

    Christian (quoting Luke 17:26-30): What an evil, malignant jerk of a god, destroying every person in this fairy tale, whether guilty or not – man, woman, child. Doesn’t sound worthy of belief, much less worship, this mean being.All you need is love.

  • CALIFORNIAMARTY SAYS

    Obama has been for over 22 years a student of the Rev. Wright who holds himself out as a preacher of the word of Jesus Christ, but poisons the message with anti-white, anti American and Anti-Jewish and Israel rants. When Obama takes his children to a church that is supposed to be given the children the warm clean milk of Jesus and then changes it by a drop of hate into a vile drink it is the same as the Jihadists teaching their children to hate America and Israelis and Jews.

  • nymarty

    McCain and JFK and Winston Churchill all Served Their Country-Obama Hangs With Unrepentant Terrorists, America haters, Jew Haters, slumlords and Liars-No Service Record-But did blow-

  • Anonymous

    steveco wrote “What an evil, malignant jerk of a god, destroying every person in this fairy tale, whether guilty or not – man, woman, child. Doesn’t sound worthy of belief, much less worship, this mean being.”If nukes starts raining down, was it God who pushed the button? Stupidity will destroy humanity and not God. The same stupid people will blame God instead of blaming themselves.

  • Tom Brucia

    The most obvious reason a nonbeliever (perhaps like me?) would support Obama is that he has lived among people of various religious persuasions during his varied life. Most Americans ASSUME Christianity (usually Protestant Fundamentalism) is some kind of special creed, with special rights to dip into the public treasury and get special privleges. It seems to me that Southern Baptists simply don’t get it when faced with the possibility that THEY might be a minority group (which indeed they are when one looks at the vast number of unmobilized Roman Catholics — the single largest religious bloc in 34 of the 50 states). The same goes for other Protestant sects and denominations. As for Roman Catholics, their (general) disinterest in taking power in the halls of Congress and in the Administration — and trying to impose Catholic positions on the Protestant brand of Christians is agreeable to those of us who don’t want to live in a ‘religious nation’. Obama knows that in a fair fight, Christians are outnumbered by Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and other world religions — since he has lived outside ‘hothouse America’. And he (presumably) is more aware of the horrible results of mixing politics and religion since he has actually lived in nations where this disastrous situation applies. Republicans — joined at the hip to Fundamentalist and Evangelical Protestantism — and Hillary Clinton’s American-brand of Methodism (based on feelings related to the ‘Holy Spirit’) have no consciousness whatsoever of the fact they’re tiny minorities in the world’s palette of religions. Better a man like Obama, who knows that mixing religion and political administration is like mixing matches and gasoline. He simply seems more AWARE… not another brain-dead and tone-deaf politician convinced that his (or her) religious belief is somehow ‘unique’ and ‘privileged’.

  • Garak

    nymarty wrote: “McCain and JFK and Winston Churchill all Served Their Country-Obama Hangs With Unrepentant Terrorists, America haters, Jew Haters, slumlords and Liars-No Service Record-But did blow-.”You must really HATE Cheney, W, and the rest of the neocon chickenhawks. How many student deferments did Obama get? How long was he AWOL from his stateside champagne unit? As for Jew Haters, are you one of those America-hating, Israel-Firsters who want to cover up the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty? Who want arch-traitor Jonathan Pollard released because he spied for Israel? Who think there’s nothing wrong with selling top-secret US military technology to Communist China as long as the seller is Israel?

  • Charly Adams

    Maybe the best explanation why secular and religious supporters unite behind Obama is that his values are held by large numbers of secular as well as religious voters. In my experience the human values Obama represents are not the exclusive domain of religion as your basic question seems to imply. Obama’s challenge is to convince larger numbers of the religious electorate that their religion embodies most of those same values his campaign represents. That will take a while given the Republicans’ success in promulgating ‘God is American’ et al. from evangelical pulpits.

  • frank burns

    The no religion crowd is certainly a huge and powerful voting block. Trouble is, they aren’t organized around tele-non-evangelists for example — no lobby, no organization.

  • chris

    One aspect of the religious ‘thing’; Churches in america are quite segregated. How ‘christian’ is that? Ergo, black preachers vent. Oh, reverend wright, how outrageous! Makes for good media entertainment, like hip hop, much of which is also

  • S C Cromett

    “I hope I get good answers so I can use it for my upcoming book “The Book of Idiots : Look Ma, No Brains”. Hopefully, it would be published next year.”As always, Spidey, it will be your autobiography.

  • BGone

    You’re failing to account for theists. Theism is a category claimed exclusive by religion in error. There can certainly be one or more Gods that care a lot. Nobody knows. Religion’s claim of that ground is nonsense. However.Religion’s claim of exclusivity of Devil is correct. One who believes in God but not Devil has no place in churches where Devil is the primary supernatural being, to be avoided, saved from…”unless you accept Jesus Christ to save you from Devil”… is what that famous Baptist, etc expression actually says. No Devil then no religion is in order.Obama and the other two still standing know the Bible is a proved hoax. What’s the hoax of the Bible? But of course, Devil. Saying Devil is God is the hoax.Those supernatural beings are all mixed up in people’s minds. Religion thrives on confusion, fertilizer of a sorts. The Bible is the word of Devil is easy enough for anyone to understand. Is it? Do you understand? Do the candidates understand? God or Devil in the burning bush? Please don’t say that story is a hoax for that makes ministers con men.

  • John Flanagan

    OBAMA would not be good for the country. Especially since he would try to repeal the DOMA act, he shows he is not a good Christian, but wants Christian voters. His large appeal is to deists, atheists, liberals, and homosexuals. African Americans who vote for him do so only because he is black.

  • Jack

    Clinton has now taken Kentucky … Nevertheless, Montana, South Dakota and Puerto Rico are still to come.The Democratic race for nomination is still very much alive and most likely to be decided by superdelegates If you haven’t done so yet, please write a message to each of your state’s superdelegates at If you’re tired of waiting around for those super delegates to make a decision already, go to LobbyDelegates.com and push them to support either Clinton or Obama