[ExI] Yes Sam Harris Can

[aiguy at comcast.net]

From: "Stefano Vaj" <stefano.vaj at gmail.com> said:
> I beg to differ. I am not a US citizen, but I believe that the 
> pratical requirement to stay with one's church, or at least with *a* 
> church, any church, reflects more badly on the society that imposes it 
> that on the candidate that has to conform with such expectation if he 
> wants to have a chance. 
> 
> Moreover, as much as I hate hypocrisy and dishonesty, I would live 
> with it any day if the alternative were not just somebody who bows and 
> defers to the superstitions and beliefs concerned for the sake of 
> being elected, but somebody who even actually *believes* in them... 

My Reponse:
The practical requirement to stay with a church in order to get elected is 
a byproduct or the wishes of the majority.  And the will of the majority and their
right to vote for a candidate they are comfortable with is what demcarcy is all about.
So assuming your hypothetical candidate was willing to lie about his faith and religious
affiliation.  How would you know to vote for him?  How could you believe his stance
on any other issues which were important to you, because he could be lieing about those
as well.  When we reduce an election to a popularity contest on who has more charisma ,
is a better speaker and tells the majority whatever they believe the majority wants to hear 
then we are abusing the very democracy and freedom to choose who will govern us.
The honor and honesty of a candidate should always be considered and explored because 
without those nothing else the candidate tells us can have any meaning.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080326/1f709dc3/attachment.html>