IN THEORY:

Saddleback Church Pastor Rick Warren said after his recent presidential forum with candidates John McCain and Barack Obama that he could not vote for an atheist. “They’re saying, ‘I’m totally self-sufficient by [myself].’ And nobody is self-sufficient to be president by themselves. It’s too big a job.” Could you vote for an atheist for president?

The idea that atheists would not make good presidents is as absurd as saying blacks would not make good presidents. Personal beliefs, just as skin color, should not be a part of the political debate. Some of the founders and early presidents of our country were deists, which means they did not believe in the God defined by the Christian Bible.

Being president is a big job, but it is knowledge and ability that matters, not personal beliefs. Competent and ethical assistants should be chosen instead of simply selecting for adherence to total partisanship, as exemplified by Cheney, Rove, Gonzales, etc. We have had enough of being ruled by someone who claims he gets advice directly from God.

Following Warren’s advice to reject atheists would eliminate many of our wisest people, since statistics show the more educated people are, the more apt they are to be agnostics or atheists.

Jerry Parks

Member, Humanist Assn. of Orange County

To say there is no God means there are no absolute standards. Presbyterian mentor Frederick Buechner teaches that while one may say, “What is American is right and what is un-American is wrong” or “What is ethical is right and what is unethical is wrong” or “What works is right and what doesn’t work is wrong,” these bring God back under different names — nationalism, ethics and pragmatism. To be a true atheist is to ascribe absolute value to things of relative worth.

Truly, many an atheist is a believer without knowing it, just as many a believer is an atheist without knowing it. You can sincerely believe there is no God and live as though there is. You can sincerely believe there is a God and live as though there isn’t.

I could not vote for someone who is unwilling to live the full consequences of what it means to say there is a God with absolute standards.

(The Very Rev’d Canon) Peter D. Haynes

Saint Michael & All Angels Episcopal Church

Corona del Mar

I could vote for an atheist president. There is a difference between morals and religion. Atheists have morals and values. One must rethink religion. Believing in a “God without a personal God” divides even religionists. Jewish theology is so different from other religious philosophies that a Jewish president, a non-Jewish president or an atheist president would make little difference, whatever the president’s religion. What is important is the prophetic ideal of social justice in a president and living by “the Golden Rule” of Western philosophy.

The religions and spiritual traditions of the world are like fingers pointed at the moon. All religions state that we live for a purpose on earth and await a “kingdom of Heaven,” reaching for the stars for godly answers to problems of our own making. A president must answer needs and live according to moral pursuits in his life. Both presidential candidates admitted confronting and defeating evil. That qualifies them to be president on a moral standpoint. It has nothing to do with religion. Both candidates are members of a faith, and believe in God.

However, neither of them appeals personally to me. There is no Jewish vote anymore in this country. I am not voting for a president this year. If there was a better choice, even a non-religionist, who had morals and values I believed in, I would have voted for him or her.

Rabbi Marc Rubenstein