Poll: Voters open to candidates without deep religious faith

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • NoNamesAccepted St. George, UT
    Sept. 12, 2018 6:52 p.m.

    The poll reveals some important data:

    1-The claimed bias against non-religious candidates is much less than some like to claim. Fact is, I've never cared about a candidate's particular religious beliefs. I do care very much whether s/he is hostile to my beliefs and the values that flow from them.

    This, of course, is the divide between candidates who are personally less religious and those who are overtly anti-religious and hostile.

    2-The left is more than happy to have religious influences in politics when the outcome suites them as it tends to when churches speak on welfare, immigration, or gun control. Liberals oppose religious influence only when it opposes their goals such as on matters of sexual morality.

    This is a severe lack of principles. Just outcome based decisions.

    @Karen R.: "I think it's more accurate to say that some jurisdictions have required religious organizations to follow non-discrimination laws "

    The free exercise of religion is a constitutionally enumerated right. So anti-discrimination statutes must bend to the enumerated 1st amd protections at least as much as marriage statutes had to fall to the vague promises of the 14th amd. Goose & gander.

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    Sept. 12, 2018 12:24 p.m.

    They had to do a poll to learn that?

    Just look at the last election results! The winner is certainly a man "without deep religious faith"!

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 7:11 p.m.

    This isn't news. There have always been those of us willing to accept political candidates based on characteristics aside from religion.
    Having religion, after all, is no indication of policy or character. Plus, the epistemological gymnastics people undertake to rationalise the behaviour of some to fit their religion demeans religion and themselves.

    Politicall candidates can be religious. But it's fine if they're not.

  • Mackenzie Iwamoto Bronx, NY
    Sept. 11, 2018 11:20 a.m.

    It would be a major change to have so-called religious conservatives practice their religion as it was originally layed down than how they interpret it today. In other words, so-called Christians need to be more Christian and less intensely judgmental and controlling. They need to let people (and government) go about their business and leave the theological ramifications to a higher order.

    These folk can live their lives however they choose here in the secular work, believe whatever they want, but there was a reason the framers of the Constitution called for a separation of church and state. Religious conservatives have their litmus test, but they also elected the most un-religious president in history to get their agenda. It is all hypocritical to demand "Christian" identification and not care about ethical behavior.

    Americans are far more aware of the world, how we interact and what we need to go forward than 250 years ago. The last thing we need are religious extremists wanting to take us backward. They can live according to their religious teachings, but keep it within the group. One does not need religion to be a good and decent citizen. That thinking is out-dated.

  • Jim Chee Lahaina, HI
    Sept. 11, 2018 10:55 a.m.

    Could it be that people are tired of the incessant culture wars being waged by religious extremists in the Republican Party? Ever since the Republican Party was taken over by the Religious Right, there has been less compromise, less cooperation, and gridlock to the point where people have been turned off to the political process.

    Consider the factionalism that exists between various so-called "Christian" groups and their insistence on ideology and one can see the development of irreconcilable points-of-view. This is traced this back to the early 19th Century and the Great Awakening to see how divisive religion has become in this country. Now we have non-Christian groups which are competing in the national discourse and some of these "Christians" are targeting them as "The Other" to sustain an advantage in the political world.

    It is time that religion return to its original place in people's lives. We have ethical standards and values that are American, evolving from an amalgam of ideas and cultural norms. We don't need the divisiveness of religious bigotry remaining in the mix. Let's value the person who exemplifies integrity, character and honesty, not religious affiliation.

  • GingerMarshall Brooklyn, OH
    Sept. 11, 2018 10:20 a.m.

    "Christian" modified by "conservative" or "evangelical" or "Bible-believing" is a huge flashing warning sign. Those politicians are intent on passing laws, based on their doctrine, that harm people.

    I generally find politicians who lead with their religious credentials to be dangerous to freedom and free agency.

    They also tend to be beholden to corporations over people, especially minorities.

    And now we find "traditional family values" excludes loving same sex couples but includes men with multiple broken marriages and porn-star payoffs.

  • Karen R. Houston, TX
    Sept. 11, 2018 10:01 a.m.

    "Some jurisdictions, she noted, have sought to exclude religious organizations from various activities, such as adoption and foster care, because of opposition to same-sex marriage and other beliefs."

    I think it's more accurate to say that some jurisdictions have required religious organizations to follow non-discrimination laws and those that believed that doing so would be an act of violating their religious beliefs chose to withdraw their services.

    Lots of good news in this poll. Religious extremists' numbers only continue to shrink. That's never a bad thing for societies.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 9:01 a.m.

    @louie - Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 7:30 a.m.
    "To me, it's supporting someone who gives no indication he intends to live a Christian life,"
    Isnt that exactly what have now, especially in the White House."

    Yes. If you read the article, the statement you cited was preceded by this statement;
    "Jaquette also questioned the motives of evangelicals who support Trump."

    And he's right. The GOP and evangelicals can no longer claim to be a party of morality.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    Sept. 11, 2018 8:11 a.m.

    The devoutly religious can be dangerous if they happen to occupy positions of great power.

    You can't dispute the religious enthusiasm of the true believers who fly airplanes into tall buildings and blow themselves up with suicide vests, but that doesn't translate into effective leadership skills.

    Look at GW Bush. He was and is overtly religious. Before he made an executive decision, he "prayed on it."

    He prayed on it, and apparently he thought God guided him in his various actions and inactions that resulted in the largest ever terrorist strike upon our nation, the illegal invasion of Iraq, the destabilization of the middle east, the creation of ISIS, and the worst financial disaster since the Great Depression.

    We need smart, pragmatic, compassionate, and practical people in positions of power, and if they're are religious as well, that's okay too. But there is no reason why religiosity should be a criterion for selecting leaders.

  • louie Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 7:30 a.m.

    "To me, it's supporting someone who gives no indication he intends to live a Christian life,"

    Isnt that exactly what have now, especially in the White House.