Should atheists be barred from participating in politics, government, and public policy...?

You are confusing tax-free organizations, the churches, with individual peoples. The government does not tax the churches but, because of that status, the churches are not supposed to engage in politics. Individual Christians, on the other hand, are allowed to engage in politics.

By your argument individual Christians would be prohibited from engaging in politics.

The same with atheists. Tax-free atheist organizations would be prohibited from engaging in politics, but individual atheists are allowed to do so.

Your argument shows that you have an inability to reason properly, so you should be the one prohibited from engaging in politics.

That would mean that anyone claiming affiliation with any church or non profit organization would have to be excluded. I guess then they really could do away with the prayer breakfast for the opening of each session of Congress.

If your theory is that because atheist organizations claim tax exempt status (like churches) they are not paying into the system and should therefore have no right to participate in the system? Did you forget about the income, sales, and property taxes that atheists pay as individuals, just like everyone else that has a job, buys things, and owns a home?

LOL!

Miss Mouse, were you not aware that irony is forbidden on Yahoo?

You are correct in stating that atheists should be barred.

You are incorrect, however, in your assessment of sauces. Most geese enjoy sweeter varieties of sauces, preferably something lo-cal. Ganders, on the other hand, routinely add a dash of Tabasco. They don't actually enjoy these sauces, but they continually ingest hot sauce, habaneros, etc, in the assumption that it enhances their status among other ganders, and the tears running down their cheeks make them more desirable to females.

Jim, there is not any conclusive evidence that married couples are greater powerful father and mom. 2 father and mom does no longer mean married father and mom. i'm no longer shocked that's the Telegraph reporting this because of the fact, different than for the often occurring writing, it relatively is a precise-wing newspaper. they're out to get the Labour social gathering at an identical time as the going is robust. edit: That, Vegas Sideshow, isn't authentic. earnings is measured consistent with enjoyed ones if the folk stay at the same time as a pair. i be conscious of The solar thinks in yet in any different case, yet it particularly is the solar for you.

If they are a 501(c)(3) organization, they already are barred from the things that churches are regarding politics and government, so I don't really see where you are going with this.

btw, unlike churches, atheist 501(c)(3) organizations have to APPLY for that status, and have to pay for that application. Unlike churches under "Faith Based Initiatives", atheist organization have no "ten strikes per year and you're out" exceptions to the requirements.

Edit: Ah, I see what you did--you deliberately twisted his question in your answer, then you deliberatedly twisted your answer again to create this question. No wonder it makes no sense.

No, everyone in society should have an equal say and the majority rules. This is democracy. The religious or non religious affiliation or lack thereof has no bearing whatsoever.

Let me ask you a question..

Which English Speaking Country has an Atheist as their elected leader?

As long as you religious people are also barred from government and public policy.

No theist would even post a question this way. A real THEIST accepts everyone and everything. My answr to your question is NO

Absolutely not. We need secular eliteism progressing on our government benches.