Poll: 44% in US say restrict Muslims

HarryKeogh

Unregistered
H
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
11,319
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6729916/

ITHACA, N.Y. - Nearly half of all Americans believe the U.S. government should restrict the civil liberties of Muslim-Americans, according to a nationwide poll.

The survey conducted by Cornell University also found that Republicans and people who described themselves as highly religious were more apt to support curtailing Muslims’ civil liberties than Democrats or people who are less religious.
Click to expand...

And I bet 0% of respondents believed their civil rights should be curbed more than any other person.

So much for learning lessons from America's historical discriminatory policies.
 
For more info and the full report, here.

While this is not all that surprising (at least to me), the item I find most distrurbing is the 27% who think muslims "should be required to register their whereabouts with the federal governement."

At least the only group of people had a majority support for that item were the highly religious who pay a lot of attention to tv news.
 
Edit: I asked a simple question, looked up the answer, and then realized it was kind of a stupid question so I removed it.

. . . . . . . . . . . .

Response to the poll: Yikes!
 
I have been looking for the actual wording of the poll. Frankly, without knowing that there is no way to even vaguely interpret the results.
 
shanek said:
This is exactly why our founders didn't want a democracy.
Click to expand...

How many votes did the Libertarian presidential candidate get again?
 
Thank you, Mycroft. BTW, the survey was not attached.

TableŸ7Ÿ
PublicŸSupportŸforŸRestrictionsŸonŸMuslimŸAmericansŸStatementŸ
%ŸAgree

AllŸMuslimŸAmericansŸshouldŸbeŸrequiredŸtoŸregisterŸtheirŸwhereaboutsŸwithŸtheŸfederalŸgovernment.Ÿ27Ÿ

MosquesŸshouldŸbeŸcloselyŸmonitoredŸandŸsurveilledŸbyŸU.S.ŸlawŸenforcementŸagencies.Ÿ26Ÿ

U.S.ŸgovernmentŸagenciesŸshouldŸprofileŸcitizensŸasŸpotentialŸthreatsŸbasedŸonŸbeingŸMuslimŸorŸhavingŸMiddleŸEasternŸheritage.Ÿ22Ÿ

MuslimŸcivicŸandŸvolunteerŸorganizationsŸshouldŸbeŸinfiltratedŸbyŸundercoverŸlawŸenforcementŸagentsŸtoŸkeepŸwatchŸonŸtheirŸactiitiesŸandŸfundraising.Ÿ29Ÿ

AgreedŸwithŸnoneŸofŸtheŸstatementsŸ48

ŸAgreedŸwithŸoneŸstatementŸ15Ÿ

AgreedŸwithŸtwoŸorŸmoreŸstatementsŸ29Ÿ
Click to expand...

So, 42 % of Americans agree with one or more of these statements. So?

They also say this

AttentionÂ_toÂ_TVÂ_newsÂ_wasÂ_assessedÂ_byÂ_askingÂ_respondentsÂ_twoÂ_separateÂ_questionsÂ_regardingÂ_howÂ_muchÂ_attentionÂ_theyÂ_paidÂ_toÂ_newsÂ_aoutÂ_nationalÂ_politicsÂ_andÂ_toÂ_theÂ_U.S.Â_WarÂ_onÂ_Terror.Â_BothÂ_measuresÂ_wereÂ_addedÂ_toÂ_createÂ_anÂ_overallÂ_attentionÂ_measure.Â_RespondentsÂ_wereÂ_thenÂ_segmentedÂ_intoÂ_low,Â_moderate,Â_andÂ_highÂ_levelsÂ_ofÂ_attentionÂ_toÂ_TVÂ_news.Â_
Click to expand...

They are operationally defining TV News as something narrower than TV news. A nit, but a bit sloppy. What they are really saying, I think, is that people who differentially consume information on politics and the WOT behave differently than others. One might say that these people know more and respond thus. Or one might say that the consumption is an effect, not a cause of the attitudes. As it is, it is in the "nice to know" catagory.
 
It took me a while to figure out where the got the 44% figure, it seems to require some interpretation of table 7.



All Muslim Americans should be required
to register their wherabouts with the
federal government: 27%

Mosques should be closely monitored and
surveilled by U.S. law enforcement agencies: 26%

U.S. government agencies should profile
citizens as potential threats based on being
Muslim or having Middle Eastern heritage: 22%

Muslim civic and volunteer organizations
should be infiltrated by undercover law
enforcement agents to keep watch on their
activities and fundraising: 29%

Agree with none of the statements: 48%

Agree with one statement: 15%

Agree with two or more statements: 29%
Click to expand...

So assuming those that agreed with two or more statements are not also included with those that agree with only one statement, we get the 44% by adding the two.

Which frankly makes me skeptical of the survey. If 48% didn't agree with any of these statements, what happened to the other 8%? Did they not make it to the end of the survey? If so, why were they counted at all?

Also, I'm having a hard time understanding a whopping 27% agreeing that all Muslims should have to to register their wherabouts with the federal government, yet only 29% agreed to two or more statements overall. It doesn't seem natural that anyone would agree to something so draconian without also agreeing to nearly everything else, and that doesn't leave room for anyone agreeing to two lesser restrictions without agreeing to registering Muslims.

I think I'd have to see the souce data before I could accept this as true.
 
Mycroft said:
It took me a while to figure out where the got the 44% figure, it seems to require some interpretation of table 7.




I think I'd have to see the souce data before I could accept this as true.
Click to expand...

But it sounds good for people that want to say "look at how nasty those Americans are".

re. the numbers. The 27% probably would agree with most of the other things, and the number for those who agree with 2+ is higher than 27%. OK so far. But it is a bit problematic, I think, as you point out.

8% fall out? Odd. Usually they account for 100% with a DK/Refused line.
 
Ed said:
re. the numbers. The 27% probably would agree with most of the other things, and the number for those who agree with 2+ is higher than 27%. OK so far. But it is a bit problematic, I think, as you point out.
Click to expand...

I agree, but even if we accept that I have a problem with the interpretation of the rest of the numbers. If it’s supposed to show how bad we are to Muslims, consider the following:

If we place the numbers in context of Christian terrorism (the right to life crowd), then most of the results make sense. The 27% being registered with the government is absurd no matter what group we are talking about, but the other questions?

How many people would support monitoring and surveillance of churches known to be associated with groups that have bombed abortion clinics? Would it be more or less than 26%?

How many people would be in favor of profiling potential right-to-life terrorists based of affiliation with said churches? More or less than 22%?

If some Christian right-to-life charities had been caught funneling money to fugitives suspected of such terrorism, or groups known to be linked to such terrorism, how many people would support infiltration of said organizations by undercover law enforcement agents? More or less than 29%?

I think if we change the religion, none of that seems so unreasonable. If abortion clinic bombing were the threat today as it was in decades past, I think I would support all those measures except the registration.
 
CFLarsen said:
How many votes did the Libertarian presidential candidate get again?
Click to expand...

Aside from trying to pick a fight with Shanek what's the point of your question?

I, for one, am glad that the United States is a constitutional republic and not a true democracy.
 
HarryKeogh said:
Aside from trying to pick a fight with Shanek what's the point of your question?

I, for one, am glad that the United States is a constitutional republic and not a true democracy.
Click to expand...

That may be so. However, this thread is about the rising intolerance in the US, not about what political philosophy is better than another.

Shanek has to use every subject for an excuse to give a political speech, despite the fact that his politics command 0% in the elections.

Yes, this poll is highly disturbing. It shows how well on the way the US has come to a religious tyranny.

So, what are Americans going to do about it? I am sure Europeans could come up with some advice (since we've had our shares of religious tyrannies), but that never seems to go down well.
 
CFLarsen said:
That may be so. However, this thread is about the rising intolerance in the US, not about what political philosophy is better than another.

Shanek has to use every subject for an excuse to give a political speech, despite the fact that his politics command 0% in the elections.

Yes, this poll is highly disturbing. It shows how well on the way the US has come to a religious tyranny.

So, what are Americans going to do about it? I am sure Europeans could come up with some advice (since we've had our shares of religious tyrannies), but that never seems to go down well.
Click to expand...

Well from the way past threads Denmarks comes off much more as a religious tyranny than USA. What with state religion, having a monarchy and limiting rights to foreigners.

Yeah, I can't wait for that enlightenment to come to the USA.
 
Grammatron said:
Well from the way past threads Denmarks comes off much more as a religious tyranny than USA. What with state religion, having a monarchy and limiting rights to foreigners.

Yeah, I can't wait for that enlightenment to come to the USA.
Click to expand...

Me neither. Remember, I've lived in the US. I'm taking a wild guess here, but you have never actually been to Denmark, have you?
 
CFLarsen said:
Me neither. Remember, I've lived in the US. I'm taking a wild guess here, but you have never actually been to Denmark, have you?
Click to expand...

You right, I have not been to Denmark. So I won't comment on the people. However, we're talking opinon of average US person vs. Denmark law. I don't need to visit Denmark to know it has a state religion and monarchy.

And shanek correctly pointed out that if this were a pure democracy majority opinion would be law.
 
gee I wonder where people get exposed to the sort of hate rants that encourage these sort of attitudes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom