Posted on 06/21/2012 8:38:44 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Alternate headline: "Blogger's plan to be president by 2040 still on track."
Note to The One: You can admit it now.
I've blogged a bunch of these Gallup polls over the years and my demographic has always been at the bottom of the barrel preference-wise. But things are improving: In 2007, just 45 percent said they'd vote for an atheist, then last year it crept up to 49 percent. Now we're over the hump at 54. I wonder why. It's not like the "new atheism" suddenly exploded onto the national scene over the past six months, and to hear believers tell it, the new atheism is more likely to alienate people than persuade them. Maybe, maybe not. What you're seeing here, I think, is the fruit of normalization: It's not so much that people are becoming more sympathetic to atheism (although that might be true) than that, as atheists become more visible culturally, people see for themselves that we’re not that weird or threatening. Acceptance of gays works along the same lines, of course, except that they’re further along than we are. For a vivid illustration of that, follow the Gallup link up top and check out the breakdown among different age groups. Young adults react to gays and atheists similarly; older adults, not so much. Note the trendlines in the table I posted above, too. Thirty-five years ago, atheists held a double-digit lead on this question over gays. Today, the opposite is true.
This isn’t much of a partisan issue, either:
I’d love to see the demographic split on Democrats who would and wouldn’t vote for a nonbeliever. If, say, 90 percent of limousine liberals are willing to vote for an atheist, how low must the percentage be among blue-collar Dems? Ah well. Suffice it to say, it’s still risky even for a secretly atheist liberal pol to admit his lack of faith publicly.
Oh, and as for the elephant in the room, 24 percent of Democrats admit that they won’t vote for a Mormon versus just 10 percent of Republicans who say so. Overall, 18 percent of adults say they wouldn’t; a year ago, it was 22 percent. The reason that number has shrunk is almost entirely due to GOPers becoming more comfortable with a Mormon nominee as Romney advanced through the primaries. Last year, 80 percent of Republicans said they’d be willing to vote for a Mormon. This year, 90 percent say so. Mitt’s made a difference to future elections even if he doesn’t win this one.
Well, I won’t say I don’t take religion into account when I’m sizing up a candidate, but it’s only one of many things I look at. All things being the same, I’d vote for an atheist (not “new” atheist) before I’d vote for a Muslim or a “Christian” cult member, since the atheist is probably just skeptical, while the other two categories are either gullible or not critical thinkers.
If she gave me a chance, I bet I could make her call out to God :)
That’s an excellent point. Frankly, I’d be more interested in knowing how many Americans would vote for a faithful Christian, one who wasn’t afraid to call homosexuality a sin, rightly called abortion infanticide, or believed it was wrong to use government to steal from their neighbors.
“I’d vote for an atheist (not “new” atheist) before I’d vote for a Muslim or a “Christian” cult member, since the atheist is probably just skeptical, while the other two categories are either gullible or not critical thinkers.”
a) True Christians aren’t cult members (define that, please), and b) Muslims (at least fundamentalist, devout ones) are much, MUCH more than “gullible or not critical thinkers”!
Learn the Koran and their Prophet’s commands - to convert, subjugate or kill ALL “Infidels” (non-Muslims) until Islam and Sharia law reign supreme over the entire world. No exceptions, no reasoning. An apostate (any Muslim who leaves the “faith”) is to be executed. Lying whenever necessary (Taqiyya) to further their cause is also encouraged.
Contrary to what all our politically correct, ignorant or cowered politicians and media figures say, these are not the beliefs of “fringe, radical” Islam. They are the beliefs of true Islam, set forth by Muhammad.
It behooves everyone to get educated quickly on this. There are many great experts to read or listen to - Brigitte Gabriel, Steve Emerson, Jed Babbin, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, to name ja few. Most of them have to travel with bodyguards and/or employ full-time security.
So much for the “religion of peace”.
I think you are misinterpreting the chart. It doesn't show who atheists would vote for. It does show that atheists are less popular than gays.
BTW I'm an atheist and would vote for an atheist.
Just for the record. I’m not running.
What’s interesting is that apparently even the “idea” of a gay president didn’t even occur to people until 1978. And the whole idea of a black or atheist president wasn’t even asked in 1937.
That’s a list of various groups and percentage of voters who would vote for each one not a list of how many voters would vote for an atheist broken down by category.
POTUS is a policy position, not a clerical one. If an Atheist was running for President, not making his blind faith an issue, I might vote for him depending on how he stacked up against the alternatives.
However, I would never knowingly vote for an Atheist to be the pastor of a church...although perhaps I might have to rethink that in regard to Obama’s old church...
Notice I put the word Christian in quotes? That’s because I don’t think they are truly Christian if they are cult members.
As for Muslims, yes I think a lot of them are more than just gullible and not critical thinkers, but I didn’t want to get into a long drawn out thesis on Muslims when I was trying to make a simple statement comparing a few different groups. I’m well aware of their theology, behavior, and the contents of their “scriptures”.
Me vote for atheist? I think I’ll pass, Tovarishch.
I certainly would. Skepticism is a good trait in a politician. At least you know the person is being honest and not just throwing spiritual red meat to the evangelicals.
Even if you don't have the gift of faith, for America's Commander in Chief you want a leader that has the God advantage. An atheist commander facing poor odds gives up quicker. The evolutionary purpose of religion is it provides a competitive advantage during tribal warfare. Christianity has the best track record for that.
Religion also caused most tribal warfare, so it’s a wash at best.
The sand simians didn't fly our airliners into the World Trade Center out of religion. They did it out of envy over America's power and success, and a Muslim inferiority complex. It's no accident that they since built the world's tallest skyscraper after knocking ours down.
Leftists are driven by envy, so it's not surprising that they are quick to blame something other than envy for destruction, murder, war, and voting Democrat.
Al-Queda built the Burj Tower?! Funny. Tell me another one.
Okay - sorry for preaching to the choir :-)
Guess I’ve just heard the comparison so much from those who don’t know that I jumped in there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.