Gallup: Atheists, Muslims See Most Bias as Presidential Candidates
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 07:21:10 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Gallup: Atheists, Muslims See Most Bias as Presidential Candidates
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Gallup: Atheists, Muslims See Most Bias as Presidential Candidates  (Read 5210 times)
greenforest32
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,625


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 22, 2012, 04:16:24 AM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Read more at: http://www.gallup.com/poll/155285/Atheists-Muslims-Bias-Presidential-Candidates.aspx

Tables:







Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,095
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 22, 2012, 04:45:15 AM »

Some things I found interesting....
95% of pubbies would vote for a black guy
young people, while clearly more "open minded" than their elders still put atheists way behind Catholics in name only.
It's also funny that they like Mormons less than older people.
Also that, with a couple of large exceptions, 30-49 year olds are just as open minded as the youngest group.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 22, 2012, 06:47:21 AM »

Kind of hard to believe these poll numbers given what we know people tell pollsters about whether they'd vote for gay marriage. Maybe it's paranoia, but I suspect there's a small number of Americans who have bigoted intentions with voting who decline to tell a stranger on the phone.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 22, 2012, 08:30:12 AM »

New Atheism is destroying the credibility and reputation of the irreligious community. These numbers are all too low, but I'm surprised more people would vote for a black than a woman.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2012, 10:46:16 AM »

young people, while clearly more "open minded" than their elders still put atheists way behind Catholics in name only.

I notice for the youngest group the gap between atheists, gays or lesbians, and muslims isn't as wide as it is for the other groups. I'm wondering how much the groups correlate, and how one's religious upbringing affects the chance one will answer yes or no.


New Atheism is destroying the credibility and reputation of the irreligious community.

I don't know what country you think you've been living in, but being openly irreligious hasn't exactly been something that would make you considered credible in America for most of it's history. If you actually look at the data, it says only 18% would vote for an atheist in 1958, and the "New Atheists" weren't even a thing back then.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2012, 10:52:26 AM »


Pause.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 22, 2012, 10:52:56 AM »

young people, while clearly more "open minded" than their elders still put atheists way behind Catholics in name only.
New Atheism is destroying the credibility and reputation of the irreligious community.

I don't know what country you think you've been living in, but being openly irreligious hasn't exactly been something that would make you considered credible in America for most of it's history. If you actually look at the data, it says only 18% would vote for an atheist in 1958, and the "New Atheists" weren't even a thing back then.

Well, being disliked more than people who are credited with hating us (Muslims) is saying something. The acceptance of atheism has lagged behind other groups. That's saying something.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 22, 2012, 01:19:17 PM »

New Atheism is destroying the credibility and reputation of the irreligious community.

I don't know what country you think you've been living in, but being openly irreligious hasn't exactly been something that would make you considered credible in America for most of it's history. If you actually look at the data, it says only 18% would vote for an atheist in 1958, and the "New Atheists" weren't even a thing back then.

Well, being disliked more than people who are credited with hating us (Muslims) is saying something. The acceptance of atheism has lagged behind other groups. That's saying something.

Yeah, it says something, but it doesn't necessarily say the New Atheists are to blame.
Logged
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 22, 2012, 01:22:34 PM »

As a Christian and a conservative (but not necessarily a Christian conservative)- I would vote for an atheist. There is a difference between the Bill Maher/Penn Jillettes of the world and the millions of good, moral people who happen not to believe in God
Logged
Zioneer
PioneerProgress
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,451
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: June 22, 2012, 07:49:26 PM »

As a Christian and a conservative (but not necessarily a Christian conservative)- I would vote for an atheist. There is a difference between the Bill Maher/Penn Jillettes of the world and the millions of good, moral people who happen not to believe in God

As a Mormon and a liberal, same here. I despise Bill Maher and Lawrence O'Donnell, but I'd vote for an atheist if he/she stood for my political views and if he/she defended my religion as much as any other religion.
Logged
CatoMinor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,007
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: June 22, 2012, 07:58:31 PM »

There is a difference between the Bill Maher/Penn Jillettes of the world and the millions of good, moral people who happen not to believe in God

Whoah, whoah, lets not insult Penn Jillete like that. Maher is a troll, Jillet is actually a good moral person.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,426
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: June 22, 2012, 08:00:30 PM »

There is a difference between the Bill Maher/Penn Jillettes of the world and the millions of good, moral people who happen not to believe in God

Whoah, whoah, lets not insult Penn Jillete like that. Maher is a troll, Jillet is actually a good moral person.

No.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: June 22, 2012, 10:55:33 PM »

New Atheism is destroying the credibility and reputation of the irreligious community.

I don't know what country you think you've been living in, but being openly irreligious hasn't exactly been something that would make you considered credible in America for most of it's history. If you actually look at the data, it says only 18% would vote for an atheist in 1958, and the "New Atheists" weren't even a thing back then.

Well, being disliked more than people who are credited with hating us (Muslims) is saying something. The acceptance of atheism has lagged behind other groups. That's saying something.

Yeah, it says something, but it doesn't necessarily say the New Atheists are to blame.

They're not helping.
Logged
Zioneer
PioneerProgress
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,451
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: June 22, 2012, 11:38:58 PM »

There is a difference between the Bill Maher/Penn Jillettes of the world and the millions of good, moral people who happen not to believe in God

Whoah, whoah, lets not insult Penn Jillete like that. Maher is a troll, Jillet is actually a good moral person.

They're both trolls.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,095
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: June 22, 2012, 11:57:22 PM »

There is a difference between the Bill Maher/Penn Jillettes of the world and the millions of good, moral people who happen not to believe in God

Whoah, whoah, lets not insult Penn Jillete like that. Maher is a troll, Jillet is actually a good moral person.
Seconded....Penn can be a bit abrasive at times, but he is a good guy.  Maher can be funny at times, but I'm not so sure he is a good guy.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: June 23, 2012, 07:29:26 AM »

New Atheism is destroying the credibility and reputation of the irreligious community.

I don't know what country you think you've been living in, but being openly irreligious hasn't exactly been something that would make you considered credible in America for most of it's history. If you actually look at the data, it says only 18% would vote for an atheist in 1958, and the "New Atheists" weren't even a thing back then.

Well, being disliked more than people who are credited with hating us (Muslims) is saying something. The acceptance of atheism has lagged behind other groups. That's saying something.

Yeah, it says something, but it doesn't necessarily say the New Atheists are to blame.

They're not helping.

And I suppose that's because they do such terrible things like writing books to express their opinions and why they hold them. I suppose they should just shut up, go back in the closet, and pretend like they don't care about the issue?
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: June 23, 2012, 08:24:40 AM »

New Atheism is destroying the credibility and reputation of the irreligious community.

I don't know what country you think you've been living in, but being openly irreligious hasn't exactly been something that would make you considered credible in America for most of it's history. If you actually look at the data, it says only 18% would vote for an atheist in 1958, and the "New Atheists" weren't even a thing back then.

Well, being disliked more than people who are credited with hating us (Muslims) is saying something. The acceptance of atheism has lagged behind other groups. That's saying something.

Yeah, it says something, but it doesn't necessarily say the New Atheists are to blame.

They're not helping.

And I suppose that's because they do such terrible things like writing books to express their opinions and why they hold them. I suppose they should just shut up, go back in the closet, and pretend like they don't care about the issue?

And I suppose that black supremacists, heterophobes, Islamists, violent feminists, and La Raza were such good agents of tolerance and helpful in getting their groups accepted. But I suppose yes, they should stop going and trying to attack the religious majority as idiotic, ignorant, and vile. That's not helping them. Most atheists are not like that.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: June 23, 2012, 08:39:36 AM »

These numbers are all too low, but I'm surprised more people would vote for a black than a woman.

The difference is small enough as to not be statistically significant, but I'm not surprised that it would run in this direction.  Holding stereotypical opinions about men vs. women is far more socially acceptable than holding stereotypical opinions about different races.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: June 23, 2012, 09:20:46 AM »

And I suppose that black supremacists, heterophobes, Islamists, violent feminists, and La Raza were such good agents of tolerance and helpful in getting their groups accepted. But I suppose yes, they should stop going and trying to attack the religious majority as idiotic, ignorant, and vile. That's not helping them. Most atheists are not like that.

The New Atheists aren't even remotely like those groups, and it's completely idiotic of you to act like they are even remotely comparable. For instance, can you name even one act of violence perpetrated by the New Atheists? Can you even point out one place where they advocate violence in the name of atheism?
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: June 23, 2012, 09:26:45 AM »

And I suppose that black supremacists, heterophobes, Islamists, violent feminists, and La Raza were such good agents of tolerance and helpful in getting their groups accepted. But I suppose yes, they should stop going and trying to attack the religious majority as idiotic, ignorant, and vile. That's not helping them. Most atheists are not like that.

The New Atheists aren't even remotely like those groups, and it's completely idiotic of you to act like they are even remotely comparable. For instance, can you name even one act of violence perpetrated by the New Atheists? Can you even point out one place where they advocate violence in the name of atheism?

I wasn't talking about the violence angle. I was talking about the ideas of their own superiority and the idiocy/lesser status of those who do not agree with them.
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,837


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: June 23, 2012, 10:42:07 AM »

And I suppose that black supremacists, heterophobes, Islamists, violent feminists, and La Raza were such good agents of tolerance and helpful in getting their groups accepted. But I suppose yes, they should stop going and trying to attack the religious majority as idiotic, ignorant, and vile. That's not helping them. Most atheists are not like that.

The New Atheists aren't even remotely like those groups, and it's completely idiotic of you to act like they are even remotely comparable. For instance, can you name even one act of violence perpetrated by the New Atheists? Can you even point out one place where they advocate violence in the name of atheism?

I wasn't talking about the violence angle. I was talking about the ideas of their own superiority and the idiocy/lesser status of those who do not agree with them.

Proof?
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: June 23, 2012, 11:35:33 AM »

And I suppose that black supremacists, heterophobes, Islamists, violent feminists, and La Raza were such good agents of tolerance and helpful in getting their groups accepted. But I suppose yes, they should stop going and trying to attack the religious majority as idiotic, ignorant, and vile. That's not helping them. Most atheists are not like that.

The New Atheists aren't even remotely like those groups, and it's completely idiotic of you to act like they are even remotely comparable. For instance, can you name even one act of violence perpetrated by the New Atheists? Can you even point out one place where they advocate violence in the name of atheism?

I wasn't talking about the violence angle. I was talking about the ideas of their own superiority and the idiocy/lesser status of those who do not agree with them.

Since when is pointing out why you think someone wrong about an issue the same thing as thinking you are superior and they are idiots of lesser status?
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: June 23, 2012, 02:03:09 PM »


Never heard of a "black supremacists."  I'm not saying they don't exist just wondering why you are so bothered by them.
Logged
Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook
The Obamanation
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,853
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: June 23, 2012, 04:55:29 PM »


Never heard of a "black supremacists."  I'm not saying they don't exist just wondering why you are so bothered by them.

You don't know who Malcom X is??
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: June 23, 2012, 04:56:26 PM »

That 54% is actually an improvement, but still disgustingly low.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.071 seconds with 12 queries.