Rep. Pete Stark of Fremont might have crossed what some are calling "one of the last frontiers" in politics when he delighted atheists this week by acknowledging that he does not believe in a supreme being.

Just a generation ago, says Democratic political strategist Dan Newman, "you couldn't go anywhere near" such a statement, which "would have been political suicide."

Stark's frank declaration that he is "a Unitarian who does not believe in a Supreme Being" indicates, says Newman, that a significant page has been turned -- and maybe it's not such a political liability anymore.

But he adds that "time will tell whether this is a case of the Bay Area being far out front -- or merely far out."





The American Humanist Association marked the occasion with plans to run an ad in the Washington Post naming other famed atheists, such as author Kurt Vonnegut and "Saturday Night Live" comedian Julia Sweeney.

Stark isn't the first California politician to say he is a nonbeliever: California Gov. Culbert Olson, a Democrat who served from 1939 to 1943 -- and though born of Mormon parents -- said he was an atheist.

But such a declaration carries plenty of political risk. Last month, a USA Today/Gallup poll noted that fewer than half of Americans said they would vote for an atheist candidate for president even if he were "well qualified." In the same poll, 95 percent said they would vote for a similarly qualified Catholic candidate, 92 percent for a Jewish candidate and 72 percent for a Mormon candidate.

Newman says the poll shows that "anti-atheism remains the last remaining prejudice that a majority of Americans don't mind fessing up to," at least to a pollster. And he says the comments by Stark belie "the recent trend which has been in the direction of candidates increasingly wearing their religion on their sleeve."


"So often throughout American history, people who are nontheistic or don't believe in a supreme being can't get elected to public office or, if they inform the public of their view, they don't get re-elected, Edwords said. "We're trying to increase the acceptance of nontheists as every bit as American as everybody else."



He said that in polling in California "we rarely target voters by religion."

"In any other state, it's a very useful target in terms of understanding people's values and beliefs," Tulchin said.

That doesn't mean Californians "are not religious, don't believe in God, or don't go to services," he cautioned. For example, he said, "you have a fast-growing population in Latinos, and religion does matter to them, and religious issues matter to them."



"In a safe district, it means it's less of a potential problem for him than other places," he said. "The fact that he's held office for a long time and has been re-elected over and over again will not change his relationship with most voters who have been with him for years."

Still, "if he were to run for office for the first time, even as a Democrat, that could complicate things ... and made people take a closer look," he said.