I think atheists have recently mainstreamed like never before, and although there is a backlash (Hegelian antithesis) and religious extremists are home-schooling their children in growing numbers, I think a lot more children now smell a rat in religious doctrine and will feel free to question and join us.

I think there are a lot of closet atheists out there–or people who see religion as tradition and nothing more.

So perhaps we’re appointable.

And yay! Pete Stark!

…or would that, too, be political suicide for the person making the decision?

Yes, it would be suicide and I doubt that it will happen in the foreseeable future. Guilt by association has become a prominently used weapon in negative election campaigns. The Obama/Aires incident and the Kay Hagan/GAPAC incident are just two examples. No matter how tenuous, any link with anyone who might be a political embarrassment will be used against a candidate. Merely breathing the same air as someone with a political liability is a risk. Just because it didn’t work for Senator Dole doesn’t mean that politicians will stop using any association with atheists against their opponents.

Because of this,”vetting” has also become an important factor in politics. In this last campaign, insufficient background checks led to embarrassment for those making an appointment. That scrutiny will only get more intense. I doubt that even appointees for second and third level management positions in government departments will be spared this microscopic examination. “Godlessness” will be a disqualifying factor simply because it could come back years later to bite the elected official in the ass.

So much for unelectable – still a long way to go, though.

Where a theist appointee’s less egregious mistakes would be dismissed by most people with a shrug of the shoulders, an atheist appointee’s mistakes would be used as “irrefutable” proof that atheists are not fit to do anything but the most menial jobs.