Comment: This is something I posted on another forum

(See in situ)

This is something I posted on another forum

I am an athiest.

This was a comment I had made to someone who said I might not support Ron Paul because he believes in the bible and not with "logic and reason":

I never brought up the evolution point. Why? Because even though Ron said he doesn't believe in evolution (although in a book, I think he did come around), he wouldn't use religious belief/position to influence his logic and his positions.

That's what I love about Ron Paul. If you take away the bible, his positions and the logic/rationality behind those positions don't change.

What I fear about a candidate who uses the bible as his main source of "reasoning" is that if you took the bible away, and said he could not use it to justify his positions, there would be no logic or rationality behind his positions - such as the case with Rick Santorum or Michele Bachmann.

Candidates like Bachmann seem like they would absolutely support insane positions if the bible claimed it, even though the logic and evidence would contradict it (such as Iran having a nuclear missile, lying about translated documents, and other such non-sense) Those kind of candidates absolutely scare the hell out of me. They will never get my vote.

Politicians who are religious have to learn to separate their religious beliefs with their policy positions. They are not running for the office of "President of the United Theocracy of America", they are running for the president of the United States of America - and the oath only talks about supporting and protecting the constitution - not the bible.

As long as Ron Paul keeps that straight, he will always have my vote. And from my view, he has done that magnificently for both campaigns.