How could you vote for a woman, people?! There's a chance she could have had an abortion, or been in a lesbian fling, or have PMS. I couldn't vote for a woman. Plus, what about the way they yell all the time?

Perhaps to add a few.....

 

Respect for the Constitution, the powers of the states and the role of federal government. The core belief to the Bill of Rights and separation of powers. Understanding our leadership role in the world and the beacon of freedom we represent. Many of the items listed do not conflict with the basis of our country. However, it is sad to see that a person with inherent sexual disposition still suffers from a predetermined judgment of themselves by others instead of judgment to their actions and deeds.

 

 

Again, all good points and figure into the equation. Why is it wrong to also use morality and character in our decision making process?

I find it hard to believe that anyone sincerely believes that what a person does in private has no bearing on their qualifications to hold the toughest job in the land.

If they do the job well, are honest, and have goals that I believe in or at least can respect, then I don't care if they're a hermaphroditic purple scientolgist.

Here's a question. We have a list of options and those that are saying they would vote for most/all, would you or have you ever voted for the opposite party.

 

If not, then how is that choice, any different than choosing to not for one of the above options.

Here's a question. We have a list of options and those that are saying they would vote for most/all, would you or have you ever voted for the opposite party.

 

If not, then how is that choice, any different than choosing to not for one of the above options.

 

Yes, and Yes...

Yes, and Yes...

So have I.

 

 

Hello RM

Heck RM and I (correct english for my P & P fellow posters) both voted for Ross Perot who wasn't in either of the parties.

Here's a question. We have a list of options and those that are saying they would vote for most/all, would you or have you ever voted for the opposite party.

 

If not, then how is that choice, any different than choosing to not for one of the above options.

Yes, I have voted many times for someone from the other party. This thread has caused me to identify several traits that would cause me to refuse to vote for someone.

 

I would NEVER vote for someone that wouldn't vote for someone because of their religion (or lack thereof), sexual orientation, race, marital status or sex.

 

For those of you that would refuse to vote for someone for any of those categories that were listed in the poll, I assume that you feel that their inclusion in one of those groups makes them unqualified for office. That is your right, but I'd like to probe a little deeper. Do you feel that "those" people are qualified to live among the rest of us? Should they be placed in specially identified regions to keep them from contaminating the rest of us? Should "those" people have the right to vote? After all, they might vote for more of their kind. What aout owning property? If we confiscated their property we could give it to the "right" sort. No doubt they would make a more moral use of the property. Are there any other restrictions that should be placed on them? We can't be too careful. After all, those of us who are the "right" kind of people need to protect our high moral values.

Yes, I have voted many times for someone from the other party. This thread has caused me to identify several traits that would cause me to refuse to vote for someone.

 

I would NEVER vote for someone that wouldn't vote for someone because of their religion (or lack thereof), sexual orientation, race, marital status or sex.

 

For those of you that would refuse to vote for someone for any of those categories that were listed in the poll, I assume that you feel that their inclusion in one of those groups makes them unqualified for office. That is your right, but I'd like to probe a little deeper. Do you feel that "those" people are qualified to live among the rest of us? Should they be placed in specially identified regions to keep them from contaminating the rest of us? Should "those" people have the right to vote? After all, they might vote for more of their kind. What about owning property? If we confiscated their property we could give it to the "right" sort. No doubt they would make a more moral use of the property. Are there any other restrictions that should be placed on them? We can't be too careful. After all, those of us who are the "right" kind of people need to protect our high moral values.

The question was about President and I responded in kind to the question. You're dragging in issues, not related to Politics.

 

My reasons are based off the lack of faith in God, from an atheist standpoint. I don't want the guy, who has to make a decision on war or a nuclear device, not have the ability to pray for guidance or discuss with religious leaders, all the ramifications.

 

As for no on homosexuality, absolutely not as a President. Some argue choice, born or lifestyle....I have no idea but not a trait, that I would find commendable in the President, which is my opinion. If that labels me a bigot to some, than their choice. Morals should always factor into a Presidential candidate.

After all, those of us who are the "right" kind of people need to protect our high moral values.

 

When did it become fashionable to ridicule high moral values?

 

I only selected two catagories that I would not vote for and I explained my reasoning on both. If that makes me some sort of intolerant bigot then so be it.

So I guess you didn't vote for Reagan since he was almost 78 when he left office?

 

 

Not sure of the year that happened, but I'm pretty sure I was about 2 at the time....

When did it become fashionable to ridicule high moral values?

 

If I thought that most of what I've read in this thread represented high moral values, I wouldn't ridicule it. I don't think it represents high moral values or even American values. Since when did bigotry and prejudice become a high moral value?

If I thought that most of what I've read in this thread represented high moral values, I wouldn't ridicule it. I don't think it represents high moral values or even American values. Since when did bigotry and prejudice become a high moral value?

It doesn't have to be high moral values or even American values. It just has to be a voter's values, which is what most people vote with. Well there are those who vote based on looks.

If I thought that most of what I've read in this thread represented high moral values, I wouldn't ridicule it. I don't think it represents high moral values or even American values. Since when did bigotry and prejudice become a high moral value?

 

 

So because I don't want someone who doesn't believe in any type of God to lead my country that makes me a bigot?