An atheist in the White House? Why not? It’s happened before
A quick glance at American history could give non-believers hope for the future.
By Tony Hudson Published 10 December 2010 18:02
According to an excellent and thought-provoking article by Sholto Byrnes, atheism is not allowed under the constitution of Indonesia. In the scope of the article, he also claims that "a declared atheist would not stand a chance of running for America's highest office". It is something that can be said around anyone with even a fleeting knowledge of American politics and society which will, more often than not, be met with agreement. The idea that a non-religious person could not be made president of the United States is, in most circles, the conventional wisdom.
The case could be made, however, that the conventional wisdom is wrong.
First, the United States has already elected presidents with no supernatural means of support. The three names – which might sound familiar – are those of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln. These three unelectable heathens have all merited impressive memorials in Washington, DC. All three were re-elected for second terms.
Washington, America's first president, did attend church services during his adulthood, but refused to take Communion. Told by the priest that he was setting a bad example by attending but refusing to participate, he chose to stop going altogether. So while he may not have been expressly an atheist, religion was clearly not something that weighed heavily on his mind and politics. Being religiously pious may be viewed by some as an essential characteristic of a US president today, but the man regarded as "the Father of America" was anything but.
Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence and America's third president, was adamantly opposed to the establishment of a state-sponsored church. It was he who wrote the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. This document was the primary inspiration for the First Amendment to the US constitution, which forbade the establishment of any religion by the state.
Admittedly, Jefferson was more of a deist than an all-out atheist. However, Darwin's majestic theory of evolution by natural selection would sadly not be published in his lifetime. Considering Jefferson's brilliant scientific mind, being aware of and understanding that theory may have pushed him strongly into atheist territory.
Lincoln, the man who signed the Emancipation Proclamation into law, was also not consoled by supernatural ideas.
After the death of his son, he was understandably devastated. One of the reasons for this despair was the idea that there was no "next life" after this one. He believed his son was gone for ever and dismissed any notion of an afterlife (a view that was not shared by his wife, who tried all kinds of supernatural ideas in order to feel a connection with her lost child).
Lincoln never made any public pronouncements of faith, yet is still regarded by a vast number of Americans as the greatest president the nation has ever had.
So, if one looks at history, America has already elected non-religious presidents. Whether they could be classed as atheists or not is up for debate, but certainly it is possible for someone who does not subscribe to any denomination (or, in the case of Jefferson, to be repulsed by the very idea) to be elected to America's highest office. Bringing the argument into the 21st century, how many people in 2002 would have said that America would elect as its next commander-in-chief an African American with a Muslim father and an atheist mother?
The non-religious (be they atheist, agnostic or otherwise) is the fastest-growing section of American society. To dismiss the idea that the US could never elect such a person would be to dismiss the unpredictability that makes American politics so interesting.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















39 comments
Good to see Sholto being schooled by his own newspaper
========= http://clothesmall.org =========
Best regards for you all,
Looking forward to your visiting.
========= http://clothesmall.org =========
While a thought provoking article, I think it is filled with a bit too much wishful thinking, and projection of the author. I wish it were really a true reflection of our history, because the thing we need the most in the US is a dose of rationality!
Eternal life is by invitation only... you cant invite yourselves and there is good reason to keep you around as you will be finding out... soon !
Just like to remind people that the first RC to be elected President was JFK. So far no Jew Muslim or Hindu has been elected so far, but the day will surely come. I doubt if Jefferson was really an atheist; no President has been so far remembering the mores of the times. Nixon prayed on his knees for guidance when he was at his lowest ebb and Carter was an old southern christian democrat.
Ummm. . . . gearoge Washington was Baptized a Catholic in adulthood. This is revisionist history at it's worst.
All the evidence I have read indicates that George Washington did believe in a supernatural God that went further than standard deism - could you please provide a reference for your stories about communion and not attending church?
Ah, nothing like some white chauvinism from Europeans, the most racist, xenophobic, and "secular" continent on Earth! I'm proud of the UK's electoral process and superior morality to us stupid Americans. any country that would have great men like the BNP holding elected office is clearly one of superior moral standing.
God speed, my racist, tea stained teeth friend!
moronamid, you Christians like to prove your total lack of any moral values, and your breathtaking stupidity, with your constant threats of torture. Nobody is a better advertisement for atheism than uneducated Christian morons like yourself.
http://darwinkilledgod.blogspot.com/
The Australian Prime Minister,Julia Gillard has had the courage to say that she is an atheist....She was elected much to the disgust of the religious right....Maybe her courage will encourage other world leaders to speak freely.
Michael Martin Jr., Washington was not a Catholic. See my earlier post on the 12th.
India has a Sikh PM a Muslim President and an Indo-Italian running the Congress Party. How diverse can you get? Pakistan has only Muslims.
There is much to be said for multicultural, multireligious States rather than a monotheocratic autocracratic State like Saudi and Israel.
Washington was not a RC, but DC. The Stuarts were all secret RCs inc Charles II, although James II was pretty open about it, and made the mistake of trying to make everyone else Catholic, and the people kicked him out.
========= http://www.1shopping.us/ =========
Best regards for you all,
Looking forward to your visiting.
========= http://www.1shopping.us/ =========
========= http://www.1shopping.us/ =========
Best regards for you all,
Looking forward to your visiting.
========= http://www.1shopping.us/ =========
Ol' TJ didn't give a toss about religion. The main reason he wrote Virginia statute of religious freedom was to stop the religious conflicts that had beset Europe since the reformation.
IMHO most American leaders play up to being religious as that what the folks want and expect.
It is the same in Britain but reversed. Tony Blair was a leader who is more at home in the US given his religious views but had to suppress them in more secular Britain.
I'm an American atheist.
Lincoln's attitudes toward religion were complex and intensely personal (One of the best examinations of this is in a chapter of Susan Jacoby's Book "Freethinkers"). I like to summarize Lincoln's stance as "I suppose there is a God, but none of us can be sure that He is on our side." Although his personal beliefs are extremely difficult to pin down, Lincoln knew how to evoke religious imagery and religious words in his speeches, and he did this frequently, including a Thanksgiving proclamation in 1863, which was the first time that American holiday was officially placed in late November.
To a greater extent, Washington also used religious language in his public speeches and writings, consistent with his vague deism and American exceptionalism (his cautious, hopeful conviction that providence had smiled upon, and might continue to favor, a young nation). The story of Washington leaving church services before Communion -- and then deciding to stop going altogether -- was told in Jonathan Miller's TV series "A Brief History of Disbelief." I don't know what the primary source is for the notion that he stopped going to church altogether, but Dr. Miller's TV series made this claim.
Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, and Lincoln all regarded religion and "faith" as purely private matters.
Jeff D., as I covered in my post above on the 12th, The quote in the article should be qualified to say, "...he chose to stop going to church on communion days altogether." The story comes from Rev. James Abercrombie, the preacher who gave Washington the rebuke. Washington's behavior prior to the rebuke is confirmed by George Custis, who wrote, "On communion Sunday's, he left church with me after the blessing, and returned home, and we sent the carriage back for my grandmother."
So, Washington was leaving before communion and sending the carriage back for Martha, who stayed for it. He was rebuked by the Rev. Abercrombie for setting a bad example by leaving early, so he stopped going on communion Sundays (he didn't stop going to church altogether, he stopped going on communion Sundays altogether.
"With respect to the inquiry you make, I can only state the following facts: that as pastor of the Episcopal Church, observing that, on sacramental Sundays George Washington, immediately after the desk and pulpit services, went out with the greater part of the congregation -- always leaving Mrs. Washington with the other communicants -- she invariably being one -- I considered it my duty, in a sermon on public worship, to state the unhappy tendency of example, particularly of those in elevated stations, who uniformly turned their backs on the Lord's Supper. I acknowledge the remark was intended for the President; and as such he received it. A few days after, in conversation, I believe, with a Senator of the United States, he told me he had dined the day before with the President, who, in the course of conversation at the table, said that, on the previous Sunday, he had received a very just rebuke from the pulpit for always leaving the church before the administration of the sacrament; that he honored the preacher for his integrity and candor; that he had never sufficiently considered the influence of his example, and that he would not again give cause for the repetition of the reproof; and that, as he had never been a communicant, were he to become one then, it would be imputed to an ostentatious display of religious zeal, arising altogether from his elevated station. Accordingly, he never afterwards came on the morning of sacrament Sunday, though at other times he was a constant attendant in the morning."
-- The Reverend Doctor James Abercrombie
"When Congress sat in Philadelphia, President Washington attended the Episcopal Church. The rector, Dr. Abercrombie, told me that on the days when the sacrament of the Lord's Supper was to be administered, Washington's custom was to arise just before the ceremony commenced, and walk out of the church. This became a subject of remark in the congregation, as setting a bad example. At length the Doctor undertook to speak of it, with a direct allusion to the President. Washington was heard afterwards to remark that this was the first time a clergyman had thus preached to him, and he should henceforth neither trouble the Doctor or his congregation on such occasions, and ever after that, upon communion days, 'he absented himself altogether from church.'"
-- The Reverend Bird Wilson
The Dark Religious Cultist can call themselves eg: (A)Theist : meaning The belief in the existence of God or a god, especially one revealed supernaturally to humans.
The word The NON Religious etc is not used.
The Dark Religious Cultist make sure they own the Human : Mind Body and Soul. Which they have had there claw on the human brain for over 6000 Evolving years BCE -
God is superstition
Jesus is fiction (or a mushroom)
Religion is free enterprise
Mr.Hudson,
As an atheist I find this blog post to be poorly presented.
Starting with the title. Generally the title should be a statement supported by the content of the article itself and this wasn't the case.
Jefferson was a self-professed deist.
Washington was a deist as well even though he participated in the Anglican church.
Abraham Lincoln said, "When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad and that is my religion" But the fact he didn't believe in an afterlife doesn't make him an atheist either. He was ssimply disillusioned with religion due to mourning for his son. He referenced a "higher power" "almighty" and "divine providence" often. From my reading on Lincoln I think he probably took Matthew 6:6 quite literally.
Since you were talking about vague allusions to atheism, why didn't you mention John Adams, though a Unitarian, was quite outspoken against organized religion.
The glaring ommission was James Madison. Out of all the presidents Madison was the most likely to have been an atheist.
As far as I'm concerned, Obama is a closeted Atheist. He's far to intelligent & logical to believe in such crap.
Click on our website (= = = = = http:/nta.us// = = = = = ) Will bring you different surprise = = = = = http:/nta.us// = = = = == = = = = http:/nta.us// = = = = == = = = = http:/nta.us// = = = = == = = = = http:/nta.us// = = = = == = = = = http:/nta.us// = = = = == = = = = http:/nta.us// = = = = == = = = = http:/nta.us// = = = = == = = = = http:/nta.us// = = = = == = = = = http:/nta.us// = = = = == = = = = http:/nta.us// = = = = == = = = =
As an Advanced Placement US History teacher in the US, I would like to respectfully express my frustrations with this article.
First, the title is meant to lure in readers such as myself. However, it's a gross misrepresentation of what the facts of the article actually proclaim.
Every president that you mentioned has a disclaimer inserted after their name. Hardly a case for proving your point.
That being said, most of the early presidents were deists, or something of that sort. In case you were unsure, deists and atheists don't quite fall into the same camp. Since this is a commonly accepted truth, I don't need to cite any sources.
Read "The Founders on Religion" by James Hutson. When you're finished, please revise this post.
Josh
http://iamjwal.com
@NoSacredCow - valid point on Madison. His views toward religion in any form became increasingly negative as he aged.
========= http://www.1shopping.us/ =========
Best regards for you all,
Looking forward to your visiting.
========= http://www.1shopping.us/ =========
Our new female Prime Minister is an avowed atheist, to the chagrin of the religious right.
Mind you, it's the only redeeming quality she has :-)
I agree with the comments of Josh and NoSacredCow except that I haven't run across anything that would indicate Madison was or ever became an atheist (despite whatever his views were on religion).
The following quote in the article is not quite accurate: "Washington, America's first president, did attend church services during his adulthood, but refused to take Communion. When told by the priest that he was setting a bad example by attending but refusing to participate he chose to stop going altogether."
That quote should be qualified to say, "...he chose to stop going to church on communion days altogether."
To answer Dennis Keane regarding his questions about this and Washington's deism in general....
Evidence of Washington's deism comes from the available evidence and various sources. Washington did attend various churches in different places over the years, and the later testimony of ministers of those churches (to inquiries sent them after Washington died) like the Rev. William White and the Rev. James Abercrombie indicate that he was never seen taking communion or knelling in prayer. The Rev. Abercrombie responded to one inquiry by saying "Sir, Washington was a Deist." Washington's behavior prior to receiving a reprimand from Rev. Abercrombie (where the story comes from) was confirmed by George Custis, who wrote, "On communion Sunday's, he left church with me after the blessing, and returned home, and we sent the carriage back for my grandmother."
Washington was never known have a blessing before a meal in his home unless there was a clergyman there to give one, he didn't ask for any clergy on his death bed, and he was never known to reference Jesus Christ in any letter or speech (except that he did use the word "Savior" in a short poem when he was 13). [Please be aware there are many altered or phony quotes attributed to Washington (and many of the other Founders) on the Internet.] He avoided discussing his religious opinions even when people wrote to him asking for them. He almost never used the word "God," but tended to use Deist and/or Masonic phrases like, "the Divine Architect of the Universe," "Divine Providence" or "the benign Parent of the Human Race" instead. [This is similar to the Deist references in the Declaration of Independence to a "Creator" and "Nature's God." The qualification "Nature's" before "God" was an important distinction that many overlook today.]
Also, Jefferson is on record concluding Washington was a Deist in a couple of letters, and in one he said he heard from Gouverneur Morris that Washington "believed no more in that system [Christianity] than he did."
Even the story of Washington adding "so help me God" and kissing the (Masonic) Bible at the end of his swearing in is not very well supported. [The story originated from a single source (Washington Irving) many years after the fact, who claimed to have witnessed it at the inauguration when he was a child. The story is questionable because no one else reported it before then and people who were much closer in the crowd reported having trouble hearing what he said (he had a shy voice speaking publically).]
Finally, the word "Deist" might have been used more loosely back then than people define it today. There was some range of opinion that might have included some who did think that some Supreme Being guided events on some level but who didn't buy into Jesus being the Son of God.
Can no one other than 'Ridiculous' see just how idiotic this article is. How is this man published when he says the following:
"Admittedly, Jefferson was more of a deist than an all-out atheist. However, Darwin's majestic theory of evolution by natural selection would sadly not be published in his lifetime. Considering Jefferson's brilliant scientific mind, being aware of and understanding that theory may have pushed him strongly into atheist territory"
i don't know about George Washington but I suspect many of our presidents have been non-believers. A Deist is basically an atheist being polite. Stop and think about it: who would believe in a God who creates the universe and then goes off and is never again heard from? Personally I think the worst crimes against humanity have been committed in the name of secular creeds like communism and fascism. Read Orwell.
Most of the voices of social, empirical and intellectual progression would be atheists in contemporary society; if you live in a society that presupposes the existence of God, where unbelievers are seen as barbarians or madmen, it is perfectly rational to see why politicians, historians, philosophers, mathematicians and scientists all assumed God's existence was self-evident. In modern society, that doesn't really wash, and people can let go of these ridiculous human-created fallacies. What is annoying is that religion doesn't even make for a good source of moral education, and is ridiculously hypocritical; even if it were a good source of information, it would still be wrong to call it from God, and yet it is so obviously stupid in many aspects of its teaching and yet people insist upon its infallibility.
@Etch-tee
You obviously don't know what an atheist is- the clue is in the name. An atheist opposes theism, that is, belief in a God(s). People may have belief systems, but an atheist's belief system does not involve the belief in the existence of any omnipotent God-like entity- your post essentially likens my passion for Manchester United and makes it a form of theism. Am I a theist for loving Manchester United? By your absurdist logic (probably unwittingly to yourself, I'm not suggesting you prescribe to such an understanding), it implies that I am indeed no longer an atheist.
US wont be right until we can elect a black-atheist-lesbian for president!
beati qui esuriunt et sitiunt iustitiam quoniam ipsi saturabuntur
What is an atheist anyway, really? Everone believes in something, even if it is family values, or Mother Earth as in Paganism, or even Star Trek Klingonism and all that.
What if someone has entered a church of any sort of concecrated ground of any flavour? Can they then claim to be atheist in the modern traditional western sense? Once crossed the porch, there is no turning back in describing yourself religiously?
Atheism is all bunkum - everyone believes in something, and can be considered a religion of sorts, even sports.
I wonder how many American politicians are atheists but keep that a secret so they can get elected in this god-soaked country. I also wonder if President Obama only pretends to be a Christian. I doubt somebody as intelligent as Obama believes any of the Christian nonsense.
http://darwinkilledgod.blogspot.com/
Wow, three unapologetic white supremacists, two of whom were entirely complicit in the genocide of the indigenous people and owned slaves! Definitely three men I'd be proud to call part of my circle.
Glad to see atheists have no problem treating the founding fathers like religious figures, though.
All athiests will be happy to that both the current Prime Minister (David Cameron) and his Deputy (Nick Clegg)are self confessed athiests. We can breath easy knowing that no countries will be attacked after a weekend of prayer...
Tony Blair on the other hand seems to be a broken man on some kind of guilt trip...
And furthermore, respect for others beliefs is the secret, wherever you come from. And not to have bigmacs shoved down your throats as we have suffered from in the last 65 years, oh yes.
Why do you complain that an atheist can't be elected President but on the front cover praise a "Radical Jesus/Jesus as Che"? Be consistent; either you want religion or you just want to change the slogans chanted by fantasists to suit yourselves.
Jesus as creationist/flag waver member is as disgusting and stupid as Jesus the Social Worker/Activist/Guardianista. Separate church and state; they're poison together.
Either stop pretending you've got an invisible friend or come up with some rational and provable reasons why you want people to vote for your policies. Unless you do that, you and the Fundiegelicals deserve each other.
Why don't we go through history with a marker pen and decide what each character might be if he had heard someone else's arguments.
The below paragraph is the most absurd thing I have ever read.
"Admittedly, Jefferson was more of a deist than an all-out atheist. However, Darwin's majestic theory of evolution by natural selection would sadly not be published in his lifetime. Considering Jefferson's brilliant scientific mind, being aware of and understanding that theory may have pushed him strongly into atheist territory"