I am leaning toward Edwards yea he is a Christian, but during a Democratic talk with these Faith groups on CNN, he was the only one that mentioned keeping church and state separate. His stance on other issue is closer to mine than most other candidates.

I am voting Obama.

1. He is the only "presidential" candidate. So if he can only stay away from the technocratic details of his plans and keeps reiterating his principles he stands on he will be OK. Others are just boring insiders to the political process. Already corrupt.

2. If he is elected it will test the character of American voters. It will mean that they were able to overcome their cultural prejudice against non-whites, and that maybe we have finally arrived at popular acceptance of the concept that "the content of your character" should count, not the color of your skin or the beliefs one professes.

3. For the reason stated in point 2. above it would send a shock wave throughout the planet Earth and maybe, just maybe, it will lift our image among the people living outside the US. Hopefully it would erase the images of Abu-Graihb and the idea that Americans are comfortable with accepting their government use of torture, and military tactics of GESTAPO and SS. (early morning violent entry into residential homes by breaking doors and throwing grenades inside and only later checking who was there before)

So, if you are an atheist, and want to contribute to political process, vote Obama to keep the religious fanatics out of the White House starting in 2009

I'd probably say Obama.

People to stay away from: Huckabee 

I voted for Ron Paul myself. He is a strict constitutionalist and understands why keeping church and state seperate is important.

And Ron Paul is wrong. Our founding fathers founded this country on Secularism. Read some of Jeffersons' writings.

But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782

And Washington was a deist.

The civil government ... functions with complete success ... by the total separation of the Church from the State.
-- James Madison, 1819

Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprize, every expanded prospect.
-- James Madison, letter to William Bradford, Jr., April 1, 1774

I just irritates me when politicians say that this country's government was founded on religion. It was NOT. 

 i personally dont think it gets any easier than voting for ron paul.he has the most determination and constitution of any running candidate. for the first time in my life(im only 26) i actually get moved when i hear a politicain speak.(not that ive been around for very many good politicians)

  the enthusiasm and anger he shows when talking about constitutional rights and violations to them really shows where he stands, and that he wont be swayed by anything.

  i have also heard just about every other candidate make mentions to, speak of directly, and even speak directly to god...(im looking at you George W.)this needs to end.

  i dont think people realize the magnitude of the slope weve been heading down for the last several presidents. our country was founded by many atheists, including many early presidents and political figures. we need to revert to some very old ways if were going to make any progress of steering this country truly towards the seperation of church and state that we hold so sacred.

Uhm Think again.

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life.

Ron Paul

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

I still disagree with Ron Paul.

Moreover, there is ample evidence that most of our Founders were deeply religious men who never imagined a rigid separation between religious beliefs and governance. Indeed, our national documents, symbols, currency, and buildings are replete with religious symbolism. Our national motto, “In God We Trust,” is an obvious example. These symbols are entirely inconsistent with the religion-free government supposedly mandated by the First amendment.

Ron Paul

http://www.namelessheathen.com/archives/30

Perhaps someone should tell him that “In God We Trust” was declared our national motto in 1956. Maybe they should read him quotes from the founding fathers that he disagrees with.

-Bamaginian 

im not trying to make an argument that says our founding fathers held no belief in religion,nor that religion played any role in the forming of the declaration or constitution, i am trying to argue that our current president has absolutely no right invading iraq and afghanistan to create a new palestinian state, because "god told him to do it"

  this is an end round on the sep. of church and state. sure we wont make you pay taxes for a state religion that you dont practice,but well send your countrymen to die in a war fought on the premise that god speaks to mr. george w. bush, and thats what he wanted him to do.

  the genius of the constitution is that when horrendous things like this happen, it can be ammended.the authors knew that they didnt know everything.

I can't find any clear cut proof that Bush said "God told me to do it" in reference to invasion of either country. 

Excerpt:

Here is what we know for sure, so far. Journalist Arnon Regular wrote, in the June 26 edition of Ha'aretz (Israel's most reputable newspaper), that he has minutes of a meeting among top-level Palestinian leaders, including Prime Minister Mahmoud Abas. The minutes are apparently quite detailed, because Regular wrote a long article recounting very specific conversations. The last paragraph of the article reads:

"According to Abbas, Bush said: 'God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.'"

Before you jump to any conclusions, remember that you are reading a translation of a translation of a translation. Mahmoud Abas does not speak English. Bush does not speak Arabic. If Bush said these words, or something like them, Abas heard them from a translator. Then Abas repeated them, as he remembered them a couple of weeks later, in Arabic. Some unknown person wrote down what he thought he heard Abas say. Then Regular, or someone at Ha'aretz, translated them back into English-or perhaps first into Hebrew and then into English.

Clearly, we don't yet know what Bush said, or why. Just as clearly, the man has some explaining to do. And whatever the truth of the matter, he has serious problems.

First, let's give him some benefit of the doubt. Maybe he never said it. The quote could be fabricated-though it is hard to see who would gain by making it up. Maybe he did say God told him to make war, but he doesn't really believe it. He might have made it up for effect, trying to score some political points in the Middle East.

Whatever benefit he got should be far outweighed by the price he has to pay here at home. This is no little incident that can slip away and be forgotten. Once Bush is called to account, his problems will really begin.

If he confirms the Ha'aretz report, those of us who say God has no place in the Oval Office had better ring the alarm, as loud and long as we can. If he truly believes that he hears the voice of God, there is no telling what God might say tomorrow. This is a man who can launch the world's biggest arsenal of weapons of mass destruction-biological, chemical, and nuclear-at any moment.

taken from:

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0630-04.htm

I whole heartedly support our troops, but I do believe there needs to be some form of closure on this.

I mean which one is right?

Al Qaeda and 911 there were  2,974 casualties in the name of Allah?

source: wilkipedia 

The Iraq invasion, which had nothing to do with 911 since the war began has had 3952 casualties. In the name of God? 

Not including 1,173743 Iraqi civilian casualties.

Source:

http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/ 

There is no arguing that Saddam had nothing to do with 911. 

Should we (America) be offensive or defensive, or stand passively by? 

Sorry if I got off topic, but I don't know who I would Vote for, any more. Their only puppets, anyway.

-B 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuWUdUDUIDQ

Classic. 

McCain: ‘Constitution Established a Christian Nation’

 Link:http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/20070930_mccain_constitution_established_a_christian_nation/

"But I think the number one issue people should make [in the] selection of the President of the United States is, “Will this person carry on in the Judeo-Christian principled tradition that has made this nation the greatest experiment in the history of mankind?”

I honestly don't know about this election... I get so tired of hearing this country was founded on the Christian Religion. I think I'll go to the polls and write in for Thomas Jefferson, even though he is deceased.

History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose. (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Baron von Humboldt, 1813; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 370)

I. U.S. Constitution and U.S. Treaties and State Constitutions

The Constitution of the United States (1787-1788; 1st Ten Amendments ["Bill of Rights"] ratified 1791; no reference to any god is to be found in the body or in the amendments to the Constitution)

The senators and representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. (Article VI, Section 3, The Constitution of the United States.)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the freedom of press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (Amendment 1,The Constitution of the United States.)

Thomas Jefferson

(1743-1826; author, Declaration of Independence and the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom; 3rd U.S. President, 1801-1809)

Convinced that religious liberty must, most assuredly, be built into the structural frame of the new [state] government, Jefferson proposed this language [for the new Virginia constitution]: "All persons shall have full and free liberty of religious opinion; nor shall any be compelled to frequent or maintain any religious institution": freedom for religion, but also freedom from religion. (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 38. Jefferson proposed his language in 1776.)

"This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."