With Mitt Romney’s announcement of candidacy, political commentators focus on public reluctance to elect a Mormon as President. A stunning 66% told the Gallup Poll the nation “wasn’t ready” for a Mormon President, but even more – a startling 84% - said we’re not prepared to elect an atheist. The Romney campaign will no doubt correct many myths about Mormonism, but the public’s reluctance to support an atheist actually makes sense. The Declaration of Independence makes clear that our inalienable rights come from God – we are “endowed by our Creator” – so that anyone who openly denies God’s existence is likely to take the more conventional (and dangerous) view that rights are a gift from government, not the Deity. "The government giveth, the government taketh away..."-- the peril in this approach is too obvious to require explanation.

Similarly, any atheist would be far less willing to affirm absolutes, and far more likely to embrace moral relativism – a real problem in leading a country that’s currently threatened by absolute evil, and requires clear distinctions between timeless right and wrong. Without God, morality becomes negotiable and malleable, and defending God-given rights (for instance) becomes much less imperative.

Finally, Americans love their God-based holidays (Thanksgiving and Christmas, in particular) and the President traditionally issues deeply religious proclamations on these occasions. This tradition goes all the way back to President WAshington; even President Jefferson, a religious non-conformist, convened and attended Christian Sunday services at the Capitol building. With an announced atheist as President, these reverent public occasions could hardly go forward without risk of embarrassing hypocrisy.

These regular ceremonies may seem insignificant but, like "Under God" in the Pledge or "In God We Trust" on the currency, they help reenforce the idea that we are a religious people. Many people of faith consider it profoundly important that the nation move in a more worshipful and spiritual direction; prominent atheists consider it similarly important that the society at large (and the government in particular) move away from ancient "superstitions."

A reverent Mormon in the White House would encourage religiosity in general, as would an observant Jew, or devout Evangelical, or committed Catholic. When the First Family espouses religious faith (as all First Families have, to a greater or lesser extent) it helps make religiosity look normal. In the same way, a proclaimed atheist in the White House would "normalize" a point of view now espoused by only a small minority of our fellow citizens. Those who believe that America benefits when more people deny God and dismiss religiosity could enthusiastically support an atheist President, of course;  the rest of us, who believe that Judeo-Christian faith plays a positive role in this culture, could not and should not support a candidate who openly denies the existence of God.