I am an atheist. Do you think atheists should become more involved with politics? Do you think Muslims should be more involved with politics? Do you think Hindus should be more involved with politics? If you think Christians should become more involved in politics from the standpoint of influencing the laws of society to reflect their own religious perpectives, then I say absolutely NOT! We can do without another 'Christian Crusades' or for that matter another Iran or Saudi Arabia with their strictly controlled religious societies in our bahamaland. I know you christians long for the good old days of religious domination of government affairs. The problem with those 'good old days', they were only good for a select few; priests, popes and the royalty and never any good for the common folks. This is a democracy we live in based for the most part on secular laws which means no one can force their ideas and beliefs on another against their will.

So Bishops Neil Ellis and Samuel Greene along with their flocks had better get use to this concept of government and enjoy the ride for what its worth.

Should Christian be in politics? It depends what you mean by Christian. If you mean a person, who by accident of birth, happens to fall into that faith but has not real connection to it. I would say, yes, he should.

If by Christian you mean someone who is devoted to his faith but realizes that there are other people, of other faiths, or lack of faith, over which he must govern and treats will a secular respect. Then I would say yes to that also.

But if by Christian you mean a fundamentalist fanatic who's every judgement is colored by his interpretation of the Bible then I would say no. But it is a free country, let him run but keep your eyes on him! (PS the same would hold true for any person of any religion (or even atheists) who is a fanatic. Christians have not cornered the market on that.)

Yet, most Christian folk are just that, folks - not better, no worse that the rest of us. Besides, if we disqualify everyone who is Christian, whatever his stripe, from running for office who shall we get to run? I would venture to say that 99% of the population of the Bahamas would consider themselves a follower of the faith in one form or another.

I am not suggesting we eliminate all christians from offering themselves for political office only the fundamentalist intolerants members among you should be eliminated. I agree with you. As long as the christian leader understands he/she has to govern from a secular perspective, inclusive of all, only then would I have no problems. I would very much hesitate to allow a fundamentalist christian to govern us because what makes them a fundamentalist is their irrational, dogmatic and sometimes unrelenting approach to alternative views. I don't believe keeping a close watch on him/her is going to change their mindset. These types of people in my estimation are dangers to society, democracy but more importantly individual freedoms.

The only thing atheists are fanatical about is the premise Gods do not exist as far as the evidence suggest, otherwise we are just like any other average Joe. If you can disprove this premise of ours with sound concrete evidence then we will definely change our position unlike some christians. If you consider this position of atheist about gods to be fanatical then I suppose all human beliefs should be considered fanatical one way or the other.

Atheism is NOT a religious system like Christianity or Islam as you have implied. It simply is a lack of a belief in any god's existance. We don't worship gods. We don't pray to gods. We don't assemble for religious sermons. We don't construct huge edifices from which we preach our message. We just don't believe any gods exist and that's it. We do at times read the Bible but only to debate christians and point out glaring errors and contradictions in the scriptures.

Ryan, you wrote: "Atheism is NOT a religious system like Christianity of Islam. It simply is a lack of a belief in any God. We don't worship god. We don't pray to god. We don't assemble for religious sermons. We don't construct huge edifices to proselytize our message we just don't believe and that's it......"

True! But that is your belief and I respect it. Yet, in a way it is a system of belief, a belief that lacks belief. It is simple and compact. Persuasions do not have to be complicated to be valid. (I should point out that most Buddhist don't believe in a God either.) Please visit my thread in the religion section "What does your religion "do" for you." I would value your opinion.

You have proven my point about some christians once again. Despite what I have just written before, you still think I have a belief system even although I lack belief. Confusing to say the least. Buddhist may not believe in god but they do have a religious system of self-denial which they follow in hope that it will get their souls to Nirvana. Atheists do not believe in souls or diembodied spirits, or anything supernatural for that matter therefore we have no expectations of entering a heaven or a hell after we die. Nevertheless, I will look for your thread, not with the intent of answering your loaded question, but to better understand your perspective on that matter or should I say out of curiosity.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. But you wrote: " ...you still think I have a belief system even although I lack belief. Confusing to say the least." Surly that means you have a conviction that there is nothing there to believe? And why are you so reluctant to admit that this a kind of belief, conviction or call it what you will it? Confusing, to say the least.

You also wrote: "Buddhist may not believe in god but they do have a religious system of self-denial which they follow in hope that it will get their souls to Nirvana." Well, not quite. Buddha tried self-denial. It did not work. Also, Nirvana is not a place where "souls" go. Nirvana is a dissolving into the oneness of the universe.

I am glad you will look at my thread even if it is just for curiosity sake. Curiosity is good! By the way. I doubt my question is loaded but I am sure you will tell me if it is and why. (I'll look forward to it.):rolleyes:

PS You also stated: "You have proven my point about some christians once again." I don't get that. I thought I made it clear that I was Buddhist!

I suppose because there are so many simularities between Buddhists and Christians or what Jesus the Christ also taught that I sometimes confuse both doctrines and consequently the adherents or followers.:)

When did this change in Buddha take place, relinquishing self-denial as a philosophy? I thought that was the crux of your religion. Even Nirvana is not the same anymore too? This is one of the very reason I gave up on religion. Nothing is what it seems and changes in philosophies happen far to often without any tangible proof of progress. Maybe my bewilderment is not a bad condition afterall since Confusion is the language of religion.

"When did this change in Buddha take place, releasing self-denial?"

Actually, it never changed. Buddha tried to gain enlightenment via self-denial, as was the custom. But he realized that it was not to be found there. Beating up the body is not good for the soul. (Martin Luther was to discover the same thing.) Nirvana has not changed either, still the same. I mean no offence by this, to you or anyone else, but most peoples understanding of Buddhism comes from badly written books, or from the Beatles (who were more into Hinduism.)

You said, "This is one of the very reason I gave up on religion. Too many changes in philosophies without tangible proof of progress. Maybe I just too confuse which may not be a bad thing afterall since Confusion is the language of religion." I see your point. It is confusing but it is not the philosophies that change, it is the interpretation of the philosophies that often changes. Also, confusion is not the language of religion - Symbolism is.

arent christians in politics allready?????

isnt christie and almost evry other mp and minister we had of the christian faith????

you mean "born again"...then in that case i dont see where that is anybodies bussiness!!!

and if we keep on depending on our politicians to dispense morality,then there is nothing more moral based than religion!!!!

holla!!:cheers: