What to Look for When Voting This Next Election

Everyone has their own views about how the country should be run and the fact we get to vote on this is one of the reasons our country has been so great. But unfortunately politicians have become very good at making the public think they hold a particular view and once in office their actions seem to no longer be consistent with that view. With the country facing so many critical issues right now it is important that America votes for candidates that are willing stick to the views that they run on and can work together to get the country moving in the right direction again. So here are five simple bi partisan things to look for when deciding how to best cast your vote this next election.

First, looking at who the candidate’s biggest campaign contributors are is a great way to see who that candidate will fight for once in office. For example if a politician receives large donations from the oil industry, that candidate will want to keep the oil industry happy and create laws which benefit them because politicians are always in need of campaign money, and the next time the politician needs money the oil industry will want to continue supporting that candidate since they are willing to help them out in return. Although just because a politician receives money from an oil company it does not mean they are automatically going to fight for their interest and are bought because of course people and corporations are free to donate to whoever they want. However, it should become a concern when that is where most of their funding comes from, and it is unlikely a company would give money to a candidate if they weren’t willing to support policies that benefited them. When a candidate receives donations from a mix array of people it is a good sign that they will fight for the best interests of everyone.

Second, pay attention to what a candidate says when talking to different groups, if they change their message based on who they are speaking to at the moment it should be a red flag. But, if they stick to the same message even when it is not what that particular group wants to hear it is a good sign they will stick to what they say they will do once in office. If they flip flop during the campaign, you can be sure they will flip flop after.

Third, look at what the candidate has supported or done in the past, what they have done in the past is typically a good indicator of what they will do in the future. Of course people are allowed to change their stance on an issue, and that can be a good sign that they are open-minded and willing to admit their previous stance was wrong. However, it can also be a sign they are a flip flopper and are just willing to say whatever they think is popular in order to win. It can be hard if not impossible to know their true stance on an issue sometimes, but when in question go back and look at how they have most recently voted, who they have endorsed, and who they are receiving campaign contributions from.

Fourth, while it is extremely important to look at the candidate’s or party’s stance and past achievements, remember politics can get ugly and strategically in order to make one administration look bad the other party with the right circumstances can block much of what they want to do in order to make them look incompetent. This is great politics, but terrible for the country and is a huge indicator that some politicians care more about who is in power rather than helping the country. These are also the candidates who are most likely to be bought by corporations because they care more about helping out their biggest contributors than they do about helping the country, and if they are not in control it becomes difficult to help the corporations who are donating large sums of money. Remember, if a certain policy is good for the country than corporations would not need to pay politicians to support it.

Lastly, try not to focus on the candidates label i.e. liberal, conservative, libertarian etc. Often people have negative connotations toward political labels for reasons such as their parents talked negatively against them when growing up, from hearing bias reports or simply misunderstanding what they actually stand for. It can be easy for people not to listen to what a candidate has to say if they have a negative view of their label. Often when people fill out a questionnaire that asks them about their personal views on various political issues to see what party they agree most with, they find their stance on those issues are more in line with a party other than the one they had originally identified themselves with. This is why it is important not to focus on labels and look at the candidate’s actual stance; otherwise one could vote for a candidate when there was another candidate that was more in line with their views. Many times people defend their parties’ stance on an issue because it is natural to defend things one believes and they can subconsciously feel it is an attack on them as a person. So it is important to be humble and not take arguments on an issue too personal, and instead realize it is better to admit when our current view is wrong and change it rather than hold on to a stance simply because we are too stubborn to change. By not focusing on labels it is easier to make a more informed decision without bias.

With this next election so critical to our country’s future let’s hope America puts a lot of thought and consideration into their vote and does not simply vote for a party because they have always voted that way. If that is how you plan to vote this next election, then please use these five tips to see if you would still vote for the candidate you originally intended on voting for. But however you decide to vote make sure that it is carefully thought out so we can get back to being the America the world expects us to be.

Is atheism a Religion?

There has been much confusion over whether atheism is a religion. With the recent population growth of atheists these days it important to understand what this group really believes. For those who are an atheist this is a silly question, but for others this seems to be very confusing. The hope of this post is to put this mystery and confusion to rest.

Terms and definitions are very important, and if a proper definition is not given to a term, then terms can mean something different for everyone and when this happens it obviously causes much confusion. It’s hard to imagine that in a time where information is so easily accessible this can happen, but it does happen when people who are ignorant or have an agenda define a word they know little about. The definition for atheism on the website Merriam-webster.com is:

1) archaic: ungodliness, wickedness

2) a: a disbelief in the existence of deity

    b: the doctrine that there is no deity

This definition is disturbing for many reasons, first – ungodliness is accurate but it assumes that it is a bad thing by adding wickedness. Assuming most people who aren’t atheist are a mono-theist, that is like a Jehovah’s witness telling a Mormon they are wicked for not believing as they do or vice versa, or insert any two religions of your choice. Until one religion is proven to be true, who is to say ungodliness is a bad thing? For those living in Greece but didn’t believe in Zeus, where they wicked? Back then many would say yes, but of course we would not say that today.

It is interesting that people who are religious have a bigger problem with atheists than they do with those who believe in a god other than their own. If not believing in a god makes someone wicked, than wouldn’t not believing in the “true God” and following a false god make them wicked as well? Some religious people would say yes, but since they are taking their belief on faith and can’t prove their god is real, they don’t want to point the finger at other religions since that would mean putting their own belief under the microscope as well. So until one of the many God’s is proven to be real, it is ridiculous to say those who don’t believe in a god are wicked.

The definition then says atheism is “a disbelief in the existence of deity”, while this is true the definition fails to mention the disbelief is due to a lack of evidence for believing. But to be fair, people can be atheist for reasons other than a lack of evidence such as simply not being interested. It is understandable that the definition doesn’t mention a lack of evidence being a reason for disbelief, but if it is going to use words such as "ungodliness" or "wickedness" to define atheism it should mention why most are atheist.

Definition 2) b: says, “the doctrine that there is no deity”, I’m unaware of any doctrine for atheist because there is no such doctrine. But let’s take a look at the definition of doctrine on Merriam-webster.com:

1) archaic: teaching, instruction

2) a: something that is taught

    b: a principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief : dogma

    c: a principle of law established through past decisions

    d: a statement of fundamental government policy especially in international relations

    e: a military principle or set of strategies

I think we can all agree on this definition and I think particularly 2)b is a very accurate definition and is most likely how doctrine is being used when in the definition for atheism. However, atheism has no principles or position or body of principles in a branch of knowledge of system of belief. For those who don’t believe in UFO’s we don’t say they follow a doctrine, they simply just don’t believe in them due to lack of evidence. No one is born with knowledge of Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Scientology, Judaism etc. these are all taught. We are all born atheist, until indoctrinated with a religion. Therefore, atheism has no doctrine.

Now let’s look at the definition of religion as defined at Merriam-webster.com:

1) a: the state of a religious

     b (1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural

        (2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

2) a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

3) archaic: scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness

4) a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

While it should be obvious that atheist do not worship a god or the supernatural, it can appear at times that they do have some sort of belief or practice that they follow since many do share the same views on a number of topics, but these shared views have nothing to do with atheism and is a reflection on how they make decisions and process claims. Since atheist do not normally take things on faith and base their understanding of reality on science and reason they tend to come to the same conclusions on many issues. It is because of these shared views that many assume they follow some form of doctrine.

It can be confusing since there is a label for the non-existence of a religious belief. When we see list labeling groups such as Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Mormon, Hindu, atheist etc., it appears atheist have their own belief system since lumped in with other religions. But think how we would label those who don’t fall into any of those religious categories if the word atheism didn’t exist. We would use words such as “non-believer” or “don’t follow a religion”. But religions such as Christianity call anyone who doesn’t believe as they do “non-believers”, so that term could be confusing as well and “don’t follow a religion” is wordy. So we use the word “atheism” to describe this group. However, the word "non-theist" is starting to be used more these days in hopes to reduce this confusion.

While that should be enough evidence that atheism is a lack of a certain belief and not a religion, I believe there is another reason why this simple fact continues to be misrepresented and misunderstood. Many religious leaders will say that those who have lost their faith in God and have turned to atheism are “being misled by the ways of atheism” or some various form of this statement in order to give the impression that atheism is its own belief. Whether they do this on purpose or it is their own ignorance of the word, it allows them to get around the real reason people become atheist which is the lack of evidence for the claims of a god. Religious leaders do not want to have that discussion because it brings up many difficult questions that they cannot answer, and it is easier to misrepresent atheism in order to avoid those tough issues.

An accurate definition of atheism for Merriam-webster.com could better been defined simply by “the lack of a belief in a god or the supernatural”. It really is that simple, the word atheism is not meant to describe what a person believes but answers the question, “do they follow or believe in any form of theism or a god?” If their answer is no, they are (a)theist, meaning not a theist.