Seeking atheist/agnostic Republicans

[aspiringconstitutionalist]

Are you a liberty-minded Republican with a healthy skepticism of supernatural claims and bad science? Do you believe in both small government AND secularism?

The Republican Reason Caucus (http://RepublicanReason.org) is a new organization forming, and they are searching for smart/experienced volunteers to serve on their executive board. You don't have to be a super-experienced politico to apply. They are looking for board members who are young college students, ordinary hardworking individuals, or even retirees. Preferably, these individuals have a respect for liberty and the Constitution, and have supported Ron Paul.

Click here to apply for a position on the Republican Reason Caucus's executive board. (http://schmidthistory.us5.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=f84e1ad5af46bbbdda9a122f5&id=58894fd23a)

[BAllen]

Why would they specifically want agnostics and atheists? Freedom has no position on religion. It is a personal matter. Unless they're trying to pull that segment away from the Dems. It's possible there are some Dems that view Republicans as fundamentalists, but is that the main thing preventing them from joining? I don't know. Just asking.

[aspiringconstitutionalist]

Presently, there is really no mechanism for Republicans who support secularism and sound science to hold their own party's officials accountable. The non-religious wing of the GOP is very disorganized and powerless. This organization is attempting to bring all those people together to give them some representation and voice amongst their own party.

[emazur]

Had a look at the site for a few minutes. This will probably be of interest to people here - how they scored Congress based on a few particular votes (http://www.republicanreason.org/scorecards/2012%20Congressional%20Scorecard.pdf). The bad news is Ron only got a C. The good news is he was tied for the 3rd highest score, below #1 Justin Amash and #2 Pete Stark (the only open atheist in Congress who I think is also a self described socialist).


The Republican Reason Caucus graded legislators in the 2011-2012 session of the US House of Representatives based on seven key votes:
1. H.C.R. 13: Reaffirming “In God We Trust”
2. H.J.R. 117: Sending US taxpayer dollars to officially religious governments (Libya, Egypt, etc.)
3. H.R. 33: Special privileges for church investment plans
4. H.R. 4310, Sec. 537: No homosexual marriages in military chapels
5. Am. 546 to H.R. 2219: Pro-Defense Of Marriage Act amendment
6. H.R. 440: Establishing special envoy for religious minorities in Near East and South-Central Asia
7. H.R. 473: Land transfer to Boy Scouts of America
On all seven of these votes, the Republican Reason Caucus took the “Nay” position.

Ron went against this organization on #3 and 5 and declined to vote on #1 (which cost him points)

[aspiringconstitutionalist]

Also, the Republican Reason Caucus gave Sen. Rand Paul the only perfect (100%) score on their Senate scorecard: http://www.republicanreason.org/scorecards/2012%20Senate%20Scorecard.pdf

[TER]

Had a look at the site for a few minutes. This will probably be of interest to people here - how they scored Congress based on a few particular votes (http://www.republicanreason.org/scorecards/2012%20Congressional%20Scorecard.pdf). The bad news is Ron only got a C. The good news is he was tied for the 3rd highest score, below #1 Justin Amash and #2 Pete Stark (the only open atheist in Congress who I think is also a self described socialist).

FWIW, Justin Amash is a devout Orthodox Christian.

[aspiringconstitutionalist]

FWIW, Justin Amash is a devout Orthodox Christian.

True, but he doesn't seem to let his personal religious views interfere with his fidelity to the US Constitution during his congressional votes. Sen. Rand Paul, who got an A+ in the Senate scorecard, is also a devout Christian, but his votes have proved him to be a friend of secularists and non-believers.

[ZENemy]

In my opinion; We should be focusing on unity, not more GROUPS. I think we have enough groups.

[DaninPA]

In my opinion; We should be focusing on unity, not more GROUPS. I think we have enough groups.

That was my first thought as well. As long as we agree that the force of government shouldn't be used to promote or attack any religion (or lack thereof), aren't we on the same side?

[BAllen]

Marxists have a wide variety of groups that support them. This may be just another way of doing that for us, with the primary focus on freedoms, which the Democrats don't offer. All they offer is more government.

[aspiringconstitutionalist]

That was my first thought as well. As long as we agree that the force of government shouldn't be used to promote or attack any religion (or lack thereof), aren't we on the same side?

We are, but some of us interpret that principle differently in different circumstances. Some of us believe the principle you stated above is compatible with denying straight and gay couples equal treatment under the law, and some don't. Some of us believe the principle you stated above is compatible with having religious monuments on public property and a national motto of "In God We Trust" and some don't. etc.

Many libertarians/constitutionalists subscribe to anti-scientific notions about vaccines, GMOs, conspiracy theories, and others believe in using the sphere of government to impose their religious/supernatural beliefs upon others. Many libertarians/constitutionalists don't. This group is for the latter type.

[TheGrinch]

This entire movement is trying to remove religion completely out of the party's discourse, so I also don't know why the need for a group strictly for atheists/agnostics, when secularism can and does involve plenty of religious conservative/libertarians.

[phill4paul]

Makes sense to me. The "Christian Coalition" has its influence. I don't see why the atheist/agnostic Republicans cannot cement a hold. And do all that compromising BS just like the Christians.

[TheGrinch]

We are, but some of us interpret that principle differently in different circumstances. Some of us believe the principle you stated above is compatible with denying straight and gay couples equal treatment under the law, and some don't. Some of us believe the principle you stated above is compatible with having religious monuments on public property and a national motto of "In God We Trust" and some don't. etc.

Many libertarians/constitutionalists subscribe to anti-scientific notions about vaccines, GMOs, conspiracy theories, and others believe in using the sphere of government to impose their religious/supernatural beliefs upon others. Many libertarians/constitutionalists don't. This group is for the latter type.

Methinks your painting with too broad of a brush. There would be sure to be such disagreements within any group, no matter how many commonalities they share. I think us all banding together for liberty is as much agreement as you're going to find, and with the strength of numbers as well.

[alucard13mmfmj]

A lot of people have the misconception that the GOP is just a bunch of old, white, bible thumpers.

It would be nice to emphasize secularism. However, secularism might hurt the candidate in 2016 in the nominations... if you catch my drift.

Just look at santorum. always bringing in his god into everything and bashing gays. He gets 20%+ of the votes in many of the christian heavy states.

[aspiringconstitutionalist]

Methinks your painting with too broad of a brush. There would be sure to be such disagreements within any group, no matter how many commonalities they share. I think us all banding together for liberty is as much agreement as you're going to find, and with the strength of numbers as well.

We are indeed all banded together in a common cause. But that doesn't mean that as individual libertarians/constitutionalists we can't also fight for our own minor causes that maybe aren't shared by the libertarian/constitutionalist community as a whole.

[BAllen]

Methinks your painting with too broad of a brush. There would be sure to be such disagreements within any group, no matter how many commonalities they share. I think us all banding together for liberty is as much agreement as you're going to find, and with the strength of numbers as well.

Painting with a broad brush is the whole point. Dems have various groups supporting them. We can do the same. We can also steal the sympathy/victim group from the Dems.
Tell them, it's not your fault. You are a victim of cultural marxism. Wouldn't you like the freedom to make your own decisions, instead of relying on the government? Wouldn't you like to be able to define yourself, and not have someone else label you?
Use images and videos to support our cause. Firearms issue:
Show a brief interview with a liftime deputy, explaining how criminals prey on the weak. Show pictures of elderly, women, and children to support gun ownership.
Remember, the marxists have already programmed the masses to think this way. We can use the same tactics to support the cause of liberty. The populace is already primed for it. We've been going about it the wrong way, trying to use facts to persuade them, when their minds are geared towards feelings, and things that stir emotional decisions.

[Icymudpuppy]

I'm an atheist, but no longer a republican. They don't want liberty. They want their brand of authority. I'm chair of my county Libertarian party now. Our 4th meeting is tonight.

[Fukthenannystate]

Agnostic atheist, all around skeptic. Perhaps a republican in the true sense of the word, but I prefer going by libertarian for lack of better social and political labels.

[Sola_Fide]

Many libertarians/constitutionalists subscribe to anti-scientific notions about vaccines, GMOs, conspiracy theories, and others believe in using the sphere of government to impose their religious/supernatural beliefs upon others. Many libertarians/constitutionalists don't. This group is for the latter type.

Most secularists in this country and around the world are the worst kind of statists and collectivists. They impose their religion of evolutionism and statism by force through legislation and the state indoctrination camps (public schools).. It seems like you are connecting secularism with political freedom when there is no reason for the connection.

[Uriah]

Interesting...

[pcosmar]

Presently, there is really no mechanism for Republicans who support secularism and sound science to hold their own party's officials accountable. The non-religious wing of the GOP is very disorganized and powerless.

:confused:
I am a Christian(druidic?) and support sound science,, I also would have no problem with secular Government,,if there was a lot less of it.

unfortunately, I am an Independent and not a Republican.