Evangelist Ray Comfort, whose latest book is titled Fat Chance: Why Pigs Will Fly Before America has an Atheist President, wrote an article for World Net Daily all about why an atheist will never be elected president.
Short answer: You can’t trust us because we have no morals.
Polls tell us that 50 percent of U.S. voters prefer a presidential candidate to be a politically inexperienced, marijuana-smoking adulterer, rather than an atheist. This is because, despite their protests to the contrary, an atheist cannot say that rape, adultery, theft, lying, or even murder is morally wrong. If an atheist should protest and say that these things are wrong, by what standard would he make such a moral judgment?
The only way to conclude that there are moral absolutes is to conclude that there is an unchanging moral Law Giver of an unchanging moral Law. The atheist refuses to do that, and so for him nothing can be absolutely wrong.
As if Christians with that supposed moral authority are always paragons of virtue? If certain ones had their way, women would be forced to bear their rapists’ babies, LGBT people would be executed, and we would live in a theocracy.
It’s been said before, but nations where God isn’t taken seriously are thriving, prosperous, and safe. Sociologist Phil Zuckerman said that “Murder rates are actually lower in more secular nations and higher in more religious nations where belief in God is widespread.” (And atheists are hard to find in prisons, though there are plenty of other factors in play.)
Then, Comfort makes his most absurd claim:
Nor should you trust an atheist with your teenage daughter, in the workplace or in the legislature. This is because of their track record. History reveals that atheists have been responsible for the slaughter of 110,000,000 human beings.
Wow. It’s true that atheists are distrusted as much as rapists, at least according to one study, but Comfort unfairly suggests atheists are rapists. (With no citations to back that up, of course.)
And he brings out that old canard about how monsters like Stalin and Lenin committed their crimes in the name of atheism, which they absolutely did not. Saying otherwise makes as much sense as arguing Stalin and Lenin had mustaches, so we should never vote for someone who has facial hair. Because you never know…
Hell, by Comfort’s logic, we should stop giving power to men.
Here’s the main difference between politicians (or candidates) who openly identify as Christian or atheist: The Christians who wear their faith on their sleeve often have every intention of legislating the Bible as they see it. When they place their hand on the Bible as they take an oath of office, it’s not just for symbolic reasons.
The atheists who are running for office have no desire to push their atheism on everyone else. They say that explicitly — and I wouldn’t want to vote for anyone who said otherwise. They understand that elected officials have an obligation to keep church and state separate, and that they would represent Christians, Hindus, Muslims, atheists, and everyone else. The best way to govern is to make sure no one gets special treatment because of what they believe.
(Thanks to Kyle for the link. Large portions of this article were posted earlier)