This statistic disturbs me:

[Sinistrous]

In response to the question:

"Do you approve or disapprove of a federal court decision ordering an Alabama court to remove a monument to the Ten Commandments from public display in its building?"

77% of respondents DISAPPROVED of the decision. That 77% of the people are ignorant of the benefits of church - state separation bodes ill for reason ond decency in the next election.

This statistic has re-awakened my thoughts of emigration.

http://www.pollingreport.com/religion.htm

[DarkPhenyx]

1. It's an emotional response...

...to a situtation that requires logical thinking. The results do not surprise me in the least.

[ixion]

2. it's a very disturbing statistic, indeed

I've been considering emigration as well, and it's stats like this that makes the road all too clear.

[Midwest_Doc]

3. Poll Shaping

Polling data can be "shaped" in a number of ways. For example, consider responses to theses questions: "Should the ten commandments be removed?" and "Do you approve of public funding placing the symbol of a specific religion in a public building?"

Also, polling questions are set-up by prior questions. What were the questions asked before the 10 commandments question?

Polling can be manipulated to get ANY response the questioner desires.

[paulsbc]

4. so true

and remember that many polls are carried out by groups with vested interests, or shaped by those with those interests.

you can make just about any poll that will support your view by twisting what you ask and who you ask.

[Sinistrous]

5. Shaping, leading questions, vested interests, etc., etc., etc. .....

Yadda, yadda, yadda. The bottom line is SEVENTY-SEVEN percent of respondents disapproved. Push, pull, twist, and warp all you want, when nearly 4 out of 5 Americans piss on the protection of their own freedom, that is a disaster.

[Bucky]

6. "thoughts of emigration"

I'm more annoyed than disturbed, but I honestly don't understand this impulse to emigrate because you dissent from the majority or when (in this case) the majority dissent from the rule of law.

It seems like you're saying "because my rights as an American are under attack, I'm going to respond by ceasing to be an American." How is this any different from just surrendering to the bastards?

OK, I know you're just expressing a feeling and not explaining a plan to actually leave the country. But self-demoralizing talk isn't productive. Instead of joining Johnny Depp and Woody Allen in Paris, I think the Evil DUers should respond by educating people, digging in our heels, and not surrendering our Founder-given rights to not be hamstrung by somebody else's version of God. The only flag worth burning is the white flag of surrender.

In fact, I'm going to get off the computer and go argue with my Republican co-workers right now. (Then later this morning I'll lead my students in the pledge to the Texas flag and a state-mandated moment of silence--aaarrrgh!)

[AntiBushRepub]

7. Could it be....

...that this 77% percent just has a different opinion than you?

Must they be "ignorant" and people who "piss on the protection of their own freedom"....?

Maybe they're just people who feel that the monument wasn't hurting anyone, and don't see it as a state-establishment-of-religion symbol.

Why must everyone be "ingorant" and be called things like "sheeple", etc... every time a poll doesn't come out the way you'd prefer?

Is your opinion the only one that is legitimate?

-An

[Bucky]

8. "ingorance" vs different opinions

ABR,

I can't speak for the types of people who use elitist terminology like "sheeple" because I don't think humans are quite as gullible as some other lefties do.

BUT...

If 77% of the people polled said they don't see a problem with the Ten Commandments statue being made into a centerpeice for a state court's building, then those 77% truly are ignorant of how we interpret the establishment clause of the US constitution these days.

Here's an example: there are currently two different versions of the Ten Commandments. Authorized Catholic bibles alter the numbering of the Ten and omit the "graven images" reference. So which version of the 10C did the Alabama justice use, the Jewish-Protestant version or the Catholic version?

He's obviously taking sides in a religious dispute. Alabama Catholics also pay that man's salary and pay for the upkeep of that statue. Should they have to pay for him to demote their version of an important biblical text to an "unofficial" version? By insisting that these particular 10C are a cornerstone of secular legal authority, he's inherently saying that the alternate Catholic version is illegitimate in the eyes of Alabama law.

We only have a high level of religious practice (and opinion) in this country because of our long standing tradition of keeping the government out of the God business. People who try to blur the lines or abuse their elective offices to give state sanction to one religion over others truly are "pissing on" the law that protects all of us.

This one Alabama justice is distorting the question by making it an issue about whether people are pro- or anti-Ten Commandments. He's exactly the kind of demogogues that Madison and the Founders warned us about when they led us in expanding our democracy. The only cure for demogogues who twist the forces of democracy to limit the liberties of a religious minority (or any other minority) is to educate the public on the necessity of separating state from church.

Obviously a few snobs sneering at "sheeple" is gonna make that job harder for people who really care about the country. But then again, who said democracy was supposed to be easy?

[AntiBushRepub]

9. I respectfully disagree..

The question they were polled on was, at least the way it read here in the thread, was did they or did they not approve of the Federal COurt's original decision to have the monument removed, not if they approved of the the Alabama judge's behaviour afterwards.

77 percent voted that they would rather the judge have ruled the monument could stay, and right away they were derided as being igtnorant of the facts.

Who's to say they don't know the facts, yet just subscribe to a different viewpoint?

People need to remember that this is a society where alot of people's beliefs differ on alot of issues, and everyone is free to speak out.

On something as subjective as this is, who is one group to marginalize the views of another? (especially if the latter is a 3/4 majority)

Can't you just say "They feel this way, but I disagree, and I feel this way"...

.. instead of "they feel this way so they're obviously ignorant" or then away right try to illegitimize the entire poll by saying it's skewed or people can be led to answers?

If it had come out 77 percent in favor of the removal, the integrity of the poll would be diamond coated here on DU, but since it's the opposite, the integrity of the poll is being called to question.

regards all,
-An

[AntiBushRepub]

10. I respectfully disagree...

The question they were polled on was, at least the way it read here in the thread, was did they or did they not approve of the Federal COurt's original decision to have the monument removed, not if they approved of the the Alabama judge's behaviour afterwards. (which i think alot less people approve of)

77 percent voted that they would rather the judge have ruled the monument could stay, and right away they were derided as being igtnorant of the facts.

Who's to say they don't know the facts, yet just subscribe to a different viewpoint?

People need to remember that this is a society where alot of people's beliefs differ on alot of issues, and everyone is free to speak out.

On something as subjective as this is, who is one group to marginalize the views of another? (especially if the latter is a 3/4 majority)

Can't you just say "They feel this way, but I disagree, and I feel this way"...

.. instead of "they feel this way so they're obviously ignorant" or then away right try to illegitimize the entire poll by saying it's skewed or people can be led to answers?

If it had come out 77 percent in favor of the removal, the integrity of the poll would be diamond coated here on DU, but since it's the opposite, the integrity of the poll is being called to question.

regards all,
-An

[AntiBushRepub]

11. sorry about the double post.. it was an accident n/t