[Rugby]

JJ wrote:

I'd never heard of Attlee being an atheist before, which is not to say he necessarily wasn't, but if he was it was probably in a very introspective, private 19th Century sort of way, as opposed to a 21st Century Richard Dawkins / Christopher Hitchens sort of way, openly declaring organized religion to be stupid lies, etc.

It's a bit like saying, well Mackenzie King was a gay prime minister. He possibly was a homosexual, but he wasn't open about it, so it's not really relevant. That's the thing about identities in politics, they only become relevant when they are out in the open.

When smug Europeans say that "religion is not an issue over here," what they really mean is "we don't want to talk about religion." There may very well be a stronger consensus over the "proper" level of religiosity to have, which effectively takes open political debate about the matter off the table, but that doesn't mean the entire issue of religiosity is somehow dead. Many Europeans would likely find the prospect of an American-style evangelical leader of their own country scary, so obviously there are still religious hang-ups at play. Only when someone threatens the status quo with an outsider identity can we test the tolerance of that society.

I believe Attlee openly stated it. I'll try and find if I can find a quote. For the record I would like to state I'm a dual Canadian/American citizen so I'm not saying this from a European perspective, I'm saying this from my own experiences in Canada, America and from the British Isles.

I have never gotten the impression in Canada that religion is very essential to politics. I really doubt there would be much of a backlash if an openly agnostic/atheist person ran for PM, but I could be wrong. I agree with what voyager said, considering how many 'strong' atheists have a negative view of religion, while most strongly religious people don't particularly look down upon the non-religious. It seems like the debate is more if someone who is a strong, 'active' atheist could become a leader?

[Jabrwock]

Rugby wrote:

I have never gotten the impression in Canada that religion is very essential to politics. I really doubt there would be much of a backlash if an openly agnostic/atheist person ran for PM, but I could be wrong.

Hard to tell really. Look at how fast the "you can't approve of gay marriage, you're a Catholic" blew over up here.

Quote:

I agree with what voyager said, considering how many 'strong' atheists have a negative view of religion, while most strongly religious people don't particularly look down upon the non-religious.

The difference I think is that most atheists aren't vocal about it. The ones who are generally have a specific bone to pick, or frankly, are s**t disturbers.

It's generally the same on the other side though. I find those who pronounce their faith the loudest are usually doing it in order to fluff up their argument against whatever they are railing against. "I'm right because I'm more pious than you..."