You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
It depends. Politicians are also supposed to represent the people that elected them. So if a representative from an area that has a fairly favorable view of abortion (meaning they don't think it should be illegal) personally feels it should be illegal due to their personal religious convictions, which should win out?
in an ideal world, the voters would know his personal religious convictions and would vote accordingly, thus accepting his views, or at least tolerating it.
And what if the elected official changes their world view/religion mid-term? Finds Jesus, realizes Islam is the one true religion, etc?
Wouldn't it be easier to say that religion is something that is personal and that anyone that is running to be a public servant would only take the views of the people who elected them and put their religious convictions aside? Said representative could still go back to the public if their views on a matter changed, have a townhall about it and, if they can convince their public to change their views, great, and if the public says no to the new view, then the representative follows their collective will.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] iamjanesleftnipple 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
It depends. Politicians are also supposed to represent the people that elected them. So if a representative from an area that has a fairly favorable view of abortion (meaning they don't think it should be illegal) personally feels it should be illegal due to their personal religious convictions, which should win out?
[–] Aged [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Well, if he promised that he would follow the opinion of his voters, then he is a liar. If he never said that, then the voters are idiots.
[–] Mr_Teatime ago
in an ideal world, the voters would know his personal religious convictions and would vote accordingly, thus accepting his views, or at least tolerating it.
[–] iamjanesleftnipple ago
And what if the elected official changes their world view/religion mid-term? Finds Jesus, realizes Islam is the one true religion, etc?
Wouldn't it be easier to say that religion is something that is personal and that anyone that is running to be a public servant would only take the views of the people who elected them and put their religious convictions aside? Said representative could still go back to the public if their views on a matter changed, have a townhall about it and, if they can convince their public to change their views, great, and if the public says no to the new view, then the representative follows their collective will.