This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← More See "Too Much" Religious Talk by Politicians - Santorum Voters Disagree

More See "Too Much" Religious Talk by Politicians - Santorum Voters Disagree - Comments

Stafford Gordon's Avatar Comment 1 by Stafford Gordon

Could reason and logic be re-establishing themselves in the success story of our species; and America?

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 20:50:40 UTC | #929410

aroundtown's Avatar Comment 2 by aroundtown

Obviously some of the new figures are encouraging. I guess if you are backed into a corner and poked in the chest a sufficient amount of times it can illicit a response. The most beneficial aspect to my mind would be the use of the conservative argument as expressed by GW that 54% is a majority and should dismiss the 46% who oppose. If they, the religious, have qualms with a separation of religion and politics they would then have to shelve those concerns for the majority view as measured by their own standards. Just saying it could be a useful tool since they are generally a hard necked people to reason with and the strategy might help. More than likely wishful thinking on my part and they would just say Jesus wouldn't want them to back down, it's hard to deal with them as most can attest.

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 20:56:57 UTC | #929413

Neodarwinian's Avatar Comment 3 by Neodarwinian

' More See "Too Much" Religious Talk by Politicians - Santorum Voters Disagree '****

Not too surprising this!!

Still the " most " that say religion should stay out of politics is not nearly big evough to make me that comfortable just yet.

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 21:24:57 UTC | #929420

AULhall's Avatar Comment 4 by AULhall

Comment 2 by aroundtown :

Obviously some of the new figures are encouraging. I guess if you are backed into a corner and poked in the chest a sufficient amount of times it can illicit a response. The most beneficial aspect to my mind would be the use of the conservative argument as expressed by GW that 54% is a majority and should dismiss the 46% who oppose. If they, the religious, have qualms with a separation of religion and politics they would then have to shelve those concerns for the majority view as measured by their own standards. Just saying it could be a useful tool since they are generally a hard necked people to reason with and the strategy might help. More than likely wishful thinking on my part and they would just say Jesus wouldn't want them to back down, it's hard to deal with them as most can attest.

As other posters on this site have elucidated in the past regarding the UK, as soon as religion goes from being a majority to a minority, they seem to immediately switch from "respect the opinions of the majority" to "don't persecute the minority for their opinions".

So while I agree that the results of this poll show an encouraging trend toward U.S. secularism, I cannot see the trend in and of itself having a positive effect on the attitudes of religious ideologues.

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 21:34:19 UTC | #929424

Yabba-Dabba-Doo's Avatar Comment 5 by Yabba-Dabba-Doo

The 'Too Much' and 'Too Little' numbers are interesting but the stat that really gives me the creeps is the one titled 'Right Amount'. Do I even need to mention that there is no 'right amount' of religion for politics? (Except for 'zero', of course.)

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 21:37:05 UTC | #929427

rjohn19's Avatar Comment 6 by rjohn19

Maybe Santorum is a closet athiest and out to help the cause. Feed people enough of anything and they'll hate it- even ice cream.

On the other hand, maybe he's just a blithering burned out crack-head.

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 22:11:46 UTC | #929439

Sjoerd Westenborg's Avatar Comment 7 by Sjoerd Westenborg

Comment 6 by rjohn19 :

Maybe Santorum is a closet athiest and out to help the cause. Feed people enough of anything and they'll hate it- even ice cream.

On the other hand, maybe he's just a blithering burned out crack-head.

Are you taking any bets? :)

As to comment nr. 5. I agree. The first thing that sprang to mind when I read the title was: 'What?! Up to now it was acceptable?'

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 22:36:47 UTC | #929449

dbl_blnd's Avatar Comment 8 by dbl_blnd

...on the other hand, religious talk by politicians seems to be at an all-time high. So is this really a trend, or just a reaction?

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 02:02:31 UTC | #929491

drumdaddy's Avatar Comment 9 by drumdaddy

Religion will not survive the scrutiny applied in politics, yet they are marching in. Their intrusiveness will be their undoing. They have gone too far, yet they redouble their multifaceted assault on secular government. Their chin is out. We're here.

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 03:42:18 UTC | #929509

UncleVanya's Avatar Comment 10 by UncleVanya

While the figures seem to be moving in the right direction recently, we are still in a situation where a total of 55% of respondents think there is either "too little" or " the right amount" of religious expression by politicians, against a backdrop of (what feels like, at least) as much public piety as we have ever seen...

On the left-hand side of the graph, the "right amount" line comes shooting down, but it seems to do this mostly to the benefit of the "too little" line, which goes sharply upwards at the same point. The "too much" line also rises quite sharply here, but not by the same extent. To my mind this seems to represent some rapid polarisation between those who wanted more public faith and those who wanted less. It was happening at around 2001-2003, which is interesting in itself.

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 07:24:04 UTC | #929541

GPWC's Avatar Comment 11 by GPWC

Despite some encouraging news here, religion is still, unfortunately, a win-win for politicians - few vote against a candidate because they wear their religion on their sleeve. Until that changes, vve will have an uphill road to keep religion out of politics.

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 08:46:25 UTC | #929549

Roy72's Avatar Comment 12 by Roy72

A very comprehensive survey, I was a bit surprised that Democrats and Republicans polled similarly ten years ago, Did they not notice the theocratic tendencies of Bush Mk 1 and Reagan?

Bush 2 was was clearly the final straw for secular Dems.

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 09:22:27 UTC | #929555

PERSON's Avatar Comment 13 by PERSON

The Republicans have become more blatant in their religious pandering, and YouTube and other internet services have allowed things intended for niche audiences but shocking to the general public to be more widely heard. It's not that they weren't said before, but that they weren't known of. Those may explain the change as much as or more than a shift in opinion.

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 10:15:12 UTC | #929566

aroundtown's Avatar Comment 14 by aroundtown

Once again a commenter on RDFRS has shown me the obvious conclusion to my mental meanderings, thank you AULhall. You stated a condition that eluded my speculation and I believe you hit the nail on the head.

Comment 12 by Roy72 - Bush 2 was was clearly the final straw for secular Dems.

Quite right on that point and I have the mental scars to prove it.

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 13:13:18 UTC | #929592

holysmokes's Avatar Comment 15 by holysmokes

They should extend the study and increase the number of people in the survey, 1500 doesn't seem like many. It is surprising to see that people over 65 years of age actually scored higher then the average on keeping churches out of government at 60%. I'd have thought the reverse would be true. I wonder if the influx of large mega-churches are swaying young adults and driving the overall numbers down?

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 13:18:21 UTC | #929596

hellosnackbar's Avatar Comment 16 by hellosnackbar

My political opinion is to the right of the democrats ;but if I were an American I'd vote democrat. The reason being that the GOP is filled with anti science God trumpeting idiots. The very idea of teaching creationism as science demonstrates a very sick perverted mind. Some of the religious right wingers on display at the moment are certifiably insane.

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 13:43:22 UTC | #929600

pinball's Avatar Comment 17 by pinball

not check all dates but..

1996- majority in favour of religion playing a part

1997-Tony Blair PM. Prayer played its part in the “war on Terror” and probably some other policies.

2000- Bush President. As above.

2006- God Delusion released.

2007 – Bush / Blair gone.

2006-present Religion majority not in favour

The tide may have been flowing this anyway but it’s nice to know the God Delusion was in tune and coincided nicely.

Perhaps even had a hand in the shift?

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 13:59:21 UTC | #929607

TeraBrat's Avatar Comment 18 by TeraBrat

I don't think these numbers mean much. There is much more religious talk now than there was in 2010 which could be why more people think there's too much. When you take into account statistical deviations there really isn't a significant change.

I have no problem with religious institutions expressing their political beliefs as long as they pay their taxes.

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:45:37 UTC | #929627

KRKBAB's Avatar Comment 19 by KRKBAB

Still, 38% is very embarrassing. The fact (if accurate) that 62% don't think there's too much religion in elections is awful. However, it is moving in the right direction- lets hope it continues in that direction.

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:51:07 UTC | #929642

Pigzig's Avatar Comment 20 by Pigzig

Not enough

Sat, 24 Mar 2012 04:54:43 UTC | #930056

S. Gudmundsson's Avatar Comment 21 by S. Gudmundsson

Santorum also thinks that Christians don't have enough power in the US government. One can only conclude the following: He is not your typical, dishonest politician. He is a visitor from Bizarro World.

Sat, 24 Mar 2012 06:46:46 UTC | #930089

Akaei's Avatar Comment 22 by Akaei

Talking about religious beliefs publicly make most people uncomfortable.

Mind you, not the vague general non-supernatural beliefs like freedom of religion, bake sales or even the "love thy neighbor" stuff... But when you get into the things "God wants," "God said," "God did," or "God will bring to pass," believers who are generally rational can be squeamish about such conversations, even as observers.

If someone who has beliefs somewhat similar to their own, promotes those beliefs publicly, the believer who witnesses the spectacle will either recognize irrationality in the promoter (and through the transitive properties: their self) or they'll be right on board. It cannot be comfortable for the more rational believers to face their own irrationality.

I'm sure a lot of christians are thinking: Jesus is great and all but could you just stop talking about him so much.

Sat, 24 Mar 2012 07:20:22 UTC | #930095

Mee Peestevone's Avatar Comment 23 by Mee Peestevone

Just north of the US border it is so different - Over 80 percent of Canadians consider themselves religious (over 70% Christians), political leaders rarely talk openly about their religiousity. Doing so can be political suicide.

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/how-the-leaders-view-religion-and-politics/article1995302/?service=mobile

Comment 22 by Akaei :

Talking about religious beliefs publicly make most people uncomfortable.

Mind you, not the vague general non-supernatural beliefs like freedom of religion, bake sales or even the "love thy neighbor" stuff... But when you get into the things "God wants," "God said," "God did," or "God will bring to pass," believers who are generally rational can be squeamish about such conversations, even as observers.

If someone who has beliefs somewhat similar to their own, promotes those beliefs publicly, the believer who witnesses the spectacle will either recognize irrationality in the promoter (and through the transitive properties: their self) or they'll be right on board. It cannot be comfortable for the more rational believers to face their own irrationality.

I'm sure a lot of christians are thinking: Jesus is great and all but could you just stop talking about him so much.

Sat, 24 Mar 2012 08:08:57 UTC | #930105