Poll: If Jesus ran for president, would you vote for him?

[rockyoumonkeys]

Definitely not. Though of course I don't necessarily agree that his views WOULD mirror those found in the Bible. They're way too contradictory. You can't "love thy neighbor" and be opposed to gay rights.

 

[ZydrateDealer]

Well I'm not a citizen of the US so I can't vote...but if I was then no. He might be the savior of the Christians but he doesn't have any idea how to run a country.

 

[ssgt splatter]

Nope.
That's it for me. I can't put it into words but I just wouldn't.

 

[Thaa'ir]

No...I believe too strongly in secularism. Religion corrupts the state and the state corrupts religion.

Still...if we were to cut out the Old Testament and scrape that into the dustbin, I might be tempted.

thats what jesus did. Didnt he preached he was bringing a new law? If christians were to follow the old testament they would be sacrificing animals every week and stoning sinners on town squares and promoting holy wars on the infidels. Oh, wait...

No...not quite. He came to "fulfill" the law, so most Christians still base many of their religious laws on it. It's what's most commonly used to condemn homosexuality...which really seems like a "pick and choose what fits my culture" sort of thing, since the Old Testament contains a LOT of random...well, I don't know how to put it any other way, a lot of random crap.

Someone else put it very nicely:

http://www.randompics.net/?p=8333

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't see the last, sarcastic part.

 

[Amphoteric]

I'm not a communist so I would say no.

 

[killjoy108]

I would vote against him
Optimus Prime 2012 >

 

[ImprovizoR]

I'm an atheist but I would because his philosophy wasn't bad. It was humanitarian. As long as he actually believes in what he's saying (unlike other politicians) he'd do great.

 

[Kyoufuu]

Your taking Christianity as a whole group. Your combing all the different forms together. You can't add Catholics to this list as the Catholics barely follow the bible anyway. For a start christening is not in the Bible. Baptism is which means fully emerged in water not being sprinkled over the head. Im a Christianity and we didn't screw the world over in the dark ages like the catholics did.

WHOAH WHOAH WHOAH, HOLD UP THERE.

For one, Catholics have Baptism. For two, the word Catholic is derived from the Greek adjective καθολικός (katholikos), meaning "universal". The universal church. The Catholic Church was the first Christian denomination. For three, you're taking Catholics as a whole group, you expletive deleted hypocrite.

 

[l0rD ChUcKl3s]

as an atheist, i would say yes. whilst the religion is a money hungry corrupt organization, Jesus was a man who promoted common human decency and respect above all else, no matter what kind of human you are/were, remove the worship god bit and he would be the perfect world leader.

 

[Leviathan_]

Nope


Religion and politics should be kept away from each other as far as possible.


I don't want the US to turn into something similar as Iran.

 

[Sylocat]

Sure, I'd vote for him. If he was actually Jesus Christ?, Son of God?, then voting for him would be a nice way to earn brownie points with his dad (and "separation of church and state," while I'm normally in favor of it, would seem somewhat obsolete if the Son of God? was actually walking around showing us his dad was real... empiricism, y'know?). And if he was just Yeshua ben Nazareth, that swarthy middle eastern preacher who got posthumously RetConned into the Messiah by the melodramatic twats who wrote the Bible... well, Yeshua ben Nazareth had some pretty damn good ideas.

 

[Talespinner]

Jesus Christ, fictional or not, is one of the wisest human beings ever. Obviously the current Christianity has very little to do with the actual teachings of Christ but let's chalk that up to human idiocy rather than something wrong with the original message.

I'd be voting for Jesus just the same way I'd be voting for the Buddha or the prophet Muhammed. These are figures that at best was so brilliant in life that religions were sculpted around their teachings later and at worst was so amazingly powerful symbols (in case of the "fictional" part) that religions were sculpted around them.

What kind of person would be better suited to govern a nation?

 

[Kadoodle]

I don't know. What's his economic plan like?

Well, he doesn't like the rich much, so either democrat or possibly communist.

off topic: I love your avatar. I also love that WKUK skit.

 

[dex-dex]

well since I do not have voting power in the states.
but even if I did, I would still say no.
because the catholic church and I have had a bad relationship.
and a country based on religion is usually going to go downhill after a while.
even the founding fathers of America were against religion!

 

[rokkolpo]

No. This country has a separation between church and state for a reason. Religious dogma should never be the basis for secular law.

Well if he was alive and truly godly, it wouldn't be faith anymore.
It would be fact.

Which I think nullifies it as a religion and makes it nature.

 

[Ca3zar416]

Just because a book claims he was a nice guy doesn't mean he is capable of running a country. Also I'm big on the whole separation of church and state and I don't think he would be capable of doing so.