sort by best latest
I fully understand what you are saying. If religion affects political views, it should be a matter of public record. However, can this be taken too far? Do candidates deserve some privacy?
Candidates should be judged on policy positions, and on how they form their beliefs. If their belief-forming processes are defective (Bush), then bad decisions will result. That's why religion matters, and their beliefs about the moral and immoral.
Does religion guarantee moral character? Would you feel that any religion guarantees character or just some religions?
When your vote effects other people, it is their business! I have a gay brother, and when people vote for homophobic candidates, it effects my brother directly. You'd need another justification for saying "it's no one else's business."
No, I don't. Every citizen with a right to vote has the right to do it as he wants, on any basis he prefers. You, on the other hand, need an excuse for this blatant attempt to trample on that right.
LOL. Um. Who said I was trampling on the right to vote????????? Did you even read my response?
Of course. I think you're not getting it. There is no further justification needed in saying that one's ballot in a free democracy is his business and no one else's. That it affects public issues is irrelevant. That's why ballots are secret.
I didn't say I should be able to SEE your ballot, but your opinions do not only belong to you. People who voted for segregationists had a major impact on African Americans; people who vote for the rich to pay more in taxes do AFFECT the rich.
Perhaps we're talking at cross purposes. There's no dispute that elections can affect issues, if not as much as we like to think. My point is there's neither any legitimate dispute that you may vote however you want, and no one else has a say in it.