Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Ransomed; pgkdan
I can see considering someone’s religion as a part of one’s selective parameters, but they would have to be pretty darn close to other attractive candidates for that to start to matter for me. So far any of the LDS presidential canidates haven’t been close enough for religion to come into play, at least for me.

Well, that's fine for you Ransomed. But you don't represent the majority of Americans.

If you click here: Election 2008: 43% Would Never Vote for Mormon Candidate (Rasmussen Poll)

Per excerpt found there: The Rasmussen Reports survey found that 35% say that a candidate's faith and religious beliefs are very important in their voting decision. Another 27% say faith and religious beliefs are somewhat important. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Evangelical Christian voters consider a candidate's faith and beliefs important. On the partisan front, 78% of Republicans say that a candidate's faith is an important consideration, a view shared by 55% of Democrats. However, there is also a significant divide on this topic within the Democratic Party. Among minority Democrats, 71% consider faith and religious beliefs an important consideration for voting. Just 44% of white Democrats agree.

So…what % of the following groups found that a candidate’s faith and religious beliefs are an important consideration for voting?
(1) Americans: 62%
(2) Evangelical Christians: 92%
(3) Republicans: 78%
(4) Democrats: 55% [still a majority]

If they didn't think a candidate's other-worldly worldviews mattered, we wouldn't see these kind of numbers.

What I've seen over & over on FR, is that some posters may say,
"Yes, I can see how this can be part of parameters" --
or, "No, it's not part of my parameters"
or, "If it's part of your parameters, you're a bigot"
...and then they wind up superimposing/projecting their own opinions onto the majority of Americans!

To pgkdan:

So, no, pgkdan...62% of Americans & 78% of Republicans who deem a candidate's religion as either "very" or "somewhat" important are NOT bigots. YOU are the intolerant one of others who shows your disdain for the liberty of the American voter -- who btw on this matter -- constitute the majority -- to consider these things.

If you're so intolerant of others' religious views -- views that they've elected NOT to keep out of the voter booth -- why don't you start a new "Bigots Against Religious Freedom" (B.A.R.F.) club or something! You can preach all you want vs. voters who don't want to vote for a future self-proclaimed would-be god or something...

Sorry, but Jim Jones taught us that not all koolaid went down smoothly.

91 posted on 07/09/2011 1:54:18 AM PDT by Colofornian (The Mormon church regards 100% of the founding fathers as apostates from the 'true' church)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]


To: Colofornian

“Well, that’s fine for you Ransomed. But you don’t represent the majority of Americans.”

No doubt. That is why I kept saying “for me”. I didn’t say anything about other folks, besides the writer who doesn’t seem to have a problem with Romney’s liberal garbage. Which is fine, I was just pointing that out.

“...and then they wind up superimposing/projecting their own opinions onto the majority of Americans!”

You can choose to make religion the most important thing for you when choosing a politician, that’s your right. Folks can say you are wrong, in turn you can say they are wrong.

Freegards


116 posted on 07/09/2011 7:22:33 AM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson