Social Question

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Which candidate has the best chance of being elected the President of the US, a declared Evangelical Christian, or Satanist?

Asked by Hypocrisy_Central (26879points) December 22nd, 2011

Lately, to me anyhow, it seem Mitt Romney is getting more buzz, because he is running as an open Evangelical Christian candidate. Would a candidate like Romney who is an Evangelical Christian have more of an edge over a candidate who says he/she is a Satanist, or would the US rather have a Satanist in the White House over an Evangelical Christian? Since we are not speaking of any other types of candidates, lets keep them out of this conversation please.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

19 Answers

Aethelflaed's avatar

Why would a Satanist have any kind of an edge over an Evangelical Christian?

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Well, off hand I don’t think many would think a Satanist trying to instill things in school or society like prayer, etc. they would just let people do as they do, much like now. That might be an edge…...

Aethelflaed's avatar

I don’t really know many Satanists or much about the religion, so I can’t really say how likely it is that they would or wouldn’t. But I think that the majority of the voting population would believe that Satanists would try to instill Satanist values into each and every person.

augustlan's avatar

How is this even a contest? The evangelical has the edge, all the way. The US won’t even elect an atheist, let alone a Satanist.

FutureMemory's avatar

Why did I waste precious seconds of my life that I’ll never get back reading this stupid question.

You KNOW a Satanist wouldn’t stand a chance.

zenvelo's avatar

Mitt Romney is NOT an evangelical Christian. He is a Mormon. There is a big difference, and some evangelical ministers have warned their followers that Romney is a member of a cult, and not a true Christian.

That being said, a satanist wouldn’t get the time of day, let alone get anywhere near to being put on a ballot.

SmashTheState's avatar

What sort of Satanist? A Laveyan Satanist? A Temple of Set Satanist? A Crowley esoteric Satanist? Or a blackmetal headbanger Satanist? Because they’re not at all the same thing.

Laveyan Satanists are not Satanists in the truest sense of the term, since they don’t believe in Satan. They’re actually neo-pagan Pan cultists of the sort which survived in the countryside of Europe well into the Middle Ages. Lavey used Satan as a kind of marketting kung fu against the christians, who stamped out Pan worship by claiming that Pan was Satan (hence the depictions of Satan as having cloven hooves, a tail, and goat horns). Lavey figured that he’d use it against them, positioning his church as the alternative to christianity. Once people got past the theatrics of the goat skulls and black candles, they’d stay for the philosophy.

The Temple of Set is an offshoot of the Laveyan Church, which views Satan as more of a spiritual force than a stand-in for Pan. They tend to be more philosophical than the Laveyan Satanists (and are connected to the esoterics through Egyptian mysticism).

The esoterics, like Crowley, draw from a wide variety of traditions, folklore, and religions, with a strong focus on Kaballah and Alchemy. Their interest in Satanism comes largely from the Catholic obsession with demonology. And again, they tend to view Satan as more of a metaphor for understanding certain elemental forces than as some dude with a Van Dyke beard and a pitchfork.

The blackmetal headbangers are probably closest to what most people think of as a Satanist, all devil-horn hand gestures and corpse paint and upside down crucifixes. They are Satanists in the same sense that punk fans are anarchists: mostly surface and for show, with the occasional “hail Satan” or Hot Topic pentagram necklace.

I don’t think any of them would be particularly successful openly, but there’s strong evidence that the Skull & Bones Society – which has produced quite a few presidents – has links to esotericism along the lines of the Rosicrucians and the Freemasons. So it’s likely that a closet Satanist would do better than an open christian evangelical.

ANef_is_Enuf's avatar

It would be a cold day in hell that Americans would vote for a Satanist (of any variety) to be president. No pun intended.
Hell, I’m not even sure I would vote for a Satanist, as there tends to be a lot of focus on hedonism and putting yourself first, and I’m not really sure that’s what we need in a president. I wouldn’t prefer either extreme, Christian or Satanist.

Also, as mentioned above, Romney is a mormon.

comity's avatar

Ronald Wilson Reagon – During the 1980s when Reagon was president there was talk about the fact that he had six letters in all of his names- Satanist?
William Jefferson Clinton – Some people called him Satan’s pet.
Barack Obama – The day after the election it was said that the daily pick lottery in his home state of Illinois was 6–6-6
A good deal of poppycock is the history in politics. Romney is a Mormon and I know of no one who is a Satanist.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@FutureMemory You KNOW a Satanist wouldn’t stand a chance. Do you even follow the news? They said that about gays marrying on US soil, or opening caressing and kissing openly in uniform too, not so long ago.

Mariah's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central I think there’s a big difference between getting a law repealed (regarding DADT) and getting elected. It’s hard enough to get elected if you’re the “wrong kind” of Christian, I hardly think someone who is essentially anti-Christian could get elected in this day and age.

CWOTUS's avatar

Oh, this question is too easy. Really, where’s the challenge?

Self-declared Christians who happen to be hypocritical, lying satanists are ALWAYS elected president in this country.

Just try getting an atheist elected, however, or someone who would admit that “We just can’t know.”

FutureMemory's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central It’s a wonder you’re free to walk the streets.

comity's avatar

I’m slow on the draw and don’t really get the question. Do you think there’s a satinist out there who will be running or is it a hypothetical question, ” if there was, would one get elected.” But, if there never was one, why would one be hypothysing about it now?

zenvelo's avatar

@comity The poster comes up with extreme hypothetical questions all the time.

@Hypocrisy_Central You might remember that Evangelicals from both parties have already been elected President- Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush. (GW Bush was not church active like Jimmy Carter, but he certainly declared himself as “Saved”.)

comity's avatar

@zenvelo I just thought it was questioned because the thought is there’s a Satanist out there ready to become President. Heaven knows Obama’s been called everything else under the sun. Maybe there are others who some consider damned.

CWOTUS's avatar

No, @comity. We are the damned. Damned if we do, and damned if we don’t.

chewhorse's avatar

I think the religious community would have a cow if a Satanist were to run, much less be elected.. It would certainly bring out the dooms day prophets.. That it could happen depends on the tolerant voters.. And @cwotus is correct.. ” Satanists seem to always be elected president in this country”.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther