Would you vote for an atheist?

[Tim the Mage]

Anthony Wells on the UK Polling Report comments on research in the UK by ComRes looking at non-political characteristcs and voting preference. This is similar to an earlier poll in the US.

This is part of Anthony's comment:

In the US survey, the most electoral objectionable group was atheists, with 53% of Americans saying they would not vote for an otherwise well-qualified Presidential candidate who was an atheist. One would expect that figure to be much lower in the UK, but actually it is still surprisingly high at 20%. One might not have guessed it, but not believing in God would appear to be almost as much of an electoral handicap for a potential leader in the UK as being Muslim or gay.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/

I'm sure Anthony either has or will post links to the full data set.

[Trinoc]

Did they ask how many people would be more likely to vote for an atheist?

[Mulder]

It's a sad comment on 53% of Americans.

[Mongrel]

It's a sad comment on 53% of Americans.

I just wish it was surprising

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/20...s_exist_pa.php
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/20...this_exist.php

[Tony Williams]

Given that only 40% of Americans believe that the theory of evolution is correct (39% don't believe it, 21% don't know) I would have expected the figure to be higher than 53%.

[Tim the Mage]

To be honest I was more interested in the UK figures. Answers to the "I wouldn't vote for a..." question are:

Black Person 5%
Old Person (72+) 42%
Gay/lesbian 23%
Muslim 23%
Atheist 20%
Divorced 7%
Female 7%
Christian 7%

On Black people the reported figures match actual polling analysis:

Roger Mortimore of MORI crunched the figures for the 2001 election and found Labour did 2.5% worse than average in seats where a ethnic minority candidate had replaced a white one, and 6.1% better in seats where a white candidate had replaced one from an ethnic minority.
Anthony Wells, UK Polling report

I guess we could do the same analysis for others if we had the data - openly gay candidates might be the easiest.

On the evolution question we are better than the USA but there's still a great deal of ignorance out there:

A BBC Horizon programme last week covering the recent court case over the teaching of intelligent design in US schools commissioned a MORI poll asking what people in Britain thought. 48% of people in Britain thought the theory of evolution best described their view, 17% thought intelligent design best described their view and, startlingly, 22% of British people thought creationism best described their view.
Anthony Wells, UK Polling Report, Jan 2006

We need to understand that politicians will exploit this kind of information - often quite subtly but in the case of atheism there is no protection. I wonder whether his admitted atheism was perhaps one of the factors that did for Neil Kinnock?

[Trinoc]

Did any of these surveys also ask how many people would be more likely to vote for someone in each of the specified groups?

It doesn't surprise me that there is a hard core of racists who would never vote for a black person, but is that more or less than those people who would think a black person better represented a particular community (or would even vote for them for racist reasons of their own)?

[Croydon Bob]

I wonder whether his admitted atheism was perhaps one of the factors that did for Neil Kinnock?

I'm sure it was one of many factors. Certainly The Sun used his lack of religion to link him to Stalin. All atheists are evil, Kinnock has so much in common with Joe that he would obviously turn the country into a military dictatorship if he became PM, etc. But I think that there were bigger factors, that made more difference.

[Croydon Bob]

Did any of these surveys also ask how many people would be more likely to vote for someone in each of the specified groups?

Yes. It would be very interesting to know. I've certainly changed my vote in a General Election to a candidate just because he was a member of Douglas Adams' fanclub. I might well switch to an atheist or skeptic almost regardless of political party.

Palin is standing for VP to get women to switch to the Republicans. Obama may be losing the "Southern Democrat" vote but he's gaining the Hispanic and some other minority groups' votes from the Republicans. African-Americans will probably turn out in greater numbers than usual.

It doesn't surprise me that there is a hard core of racists who would never vote for a black person, but is that more or less than those people who would think a black person better represented a particular community (or would even vote for them for racist reasons of their own)?

It's no coincidence that our main political parties tend to stand muslim and/or asian candidates in certain constituencies. It gains votes.

[Tony Williams]

On the evolution question we are better than the USA but there's still a great deal of ignorance out there:

The answers you will get to any such poll can vary dramatically depending on exactly how the question is phrased (as in that "Yes Minister" sketch). I can't help wondering how much the responders actually knew about ID and the way in which the judge dismissed the case.

The US survey on creationism which I mentioned was reported in the New Scientist, 19 August 2006, and was one of a series carried out by MichiganStateUniversity over the past 20 years, in the USA and in other countries. The question always posed is simple: "human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals: true or false?"

The answers given in the USA in 2005 were: true 40%; false 39%; not sure 21%. In 1985, the answers were: true 45%; false 48%; not sure 7%.

Of the other countries (mostly European) polled in 2005, only one was more sceptical of evolution than the USA, and that was the Muslim country of Turkey (true 26%; false 51%; not sure 23% - these and the following figures are approximate, read off a graph). The next most sceptical was Greece (true 52%; false 37%; not sure 11%) with the least sceptical being Iceland (true 85%; false 7%; not sure 8%). The UK scored: true 75%; false 18%; not sure 7%. Japan was the only country included from elsewhere in the world, and scored: true 77%; false 8%; not sure 15%.

A different UK survey of attitudes to religion was this one:

Saturday December 23, 2006
The Guardian

More people in Britain think religion causes harm than believe it does good, according to a Guardian/ICM poll published today. It shows that an overwhelming majority see religion as a cause of division and tension - greatly outnumbering the smaller majority who also believe that it can be a force for good.

The poll also reveals that non-believers outnumber believers in Britain by almost two to one. It paints a picture of a sceptical nation with massive doubts about the effect religion has on society: 82% of those questioned say they see religion as a cause of division and tension between people. Only 16% disagree. The findings are at odds with attempts by some religious leaders to define the country as one made up of many faith communities.

Most people have no personal faith, the poll shows, with only 33% of those questioned describing themselves as "a religious person". A clear majority, 63%, say that they are not religious - including more than half of those who describe themselves as Christian.

Older people and women are the most likely to believe in a god, with 37% of women saying they are religious, compared with 29% of men.

The findings come at the end of a year in which multiculturalism and the role of different faiths in society has been at the heart of a divisive political debate.

But a spokesman for the Church of England denied yesterday that mainstream religion was the source of tension. He also insisted that the "impression of secularism in this country is overrated".

"You also have to bear in mind how society has changed. It is more difficult to go to church now than it was. Communities are displaced, people work longer hours - it's harder to fit it in. It doesn't alter the fact that the Church of England will get 1 million people in church every Sunday, which is larger than any other gathering in the country."

The Right Rev Bishop Dunn, Bishop of Hexham and Newcastle, added: "The perception that faith is a cause of division can often be because faith is misused for other uses and other agendas."

The poll suggests, however, that in modern Britain religious observance has become a habit reserved for special occasions. Only 13% of those questioned claimed to visit a place of worship at least once a week, with 43% saying they never attended religious services.

Non-Christians are the most regular attenders - 29% say they attend a religious service at least weekly. Yet Christmas remains a religious festival for many people, with 54% of Christians questioned saying they intended to go to a religious service over the holiday period.

Well-off people are more likely to plan to visit a church at Christmas: 64% of those in the highest economic categories expect to attend, compared with 43% of those in the bottom group.

Britain's generally tolerant attitude to religion is underlined by the small proportion who say the country is best described as a Christian one. Only 17% think this. The clear majority, 62%, agree Britain is better described as "a religious country of many faiths".

ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,006 adults aged 18+ by telephone between December 12 and 13. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules.

[Tim the Mage]

The tables for the ComRes research can be accessed (this is one of the good things about published opinion polls in the UK):

http://campaigndirector.moodia.com/C...osUSAOct08.pdf

[polomint38]

I wonder whether his admitted atheism was perhaps one of the factors that did for Neil Kinnock?

Being ginger may have lost votes I'm only half joking there

Or being Welsh

[Croydon Bob]

Being ginger may have lost votes I'm only half joking there

Or being Welsh

And a slaphead, don't forget that some people don't like baldies.

[Tony Williams]

And a slaphead, don't forget that some people don't like baldies.

True - especially in the USA, I think. Has a bald presidential candidate been fielded since Ike? (Who was something of an exception, being a war hero and all).

[Matt]

True - especially in the USA, I think. Has a bald presidential candidate been fielded since Ike? (Who was something of an exception, being a war hero and all).

I'd call McCain bald, though I guess he's a war hero too.