Direct Correlation between Religion, support for Torture

[Arainach]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/04/30/religion.torture/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The more often Americans go to church, the more likely they are to support the torture of suspected terrorists, according to a new survey.

More than half of people who attend services at least once a week -- 54 percent -- said the use of torture against suspected terrorists is "often" or "sometimes" justified. Only 42 percent of people who "seldom or never" go to services agreed, according the analysis released Wednesday by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.

White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified -- more than six in 10 supported it. People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it. Only four in 10 of them did.

The analysis is based on a Pew Research Center survey of 742 American adults conducted April 14-21. It did not include analysis of groups other than white evangelicals, white non-Hispanic Catholics, white mainline Protestants and the religiously unaffiliated, because the sample size was too small.

The president of the National Association of Evangelicals, Leith Anderson, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The survey asked: "Do you think the use of torture against suspected terrorists in order to gain important information can often be justified, sometimes be justified, rarely be justified, or never be justified?"

Roughly half of all respondents -- 49 percent -- said it is often or sometimes justified. A quarter said it never is.

The religious group most likely to say torture is never justified was Protestant denominations -- such as Episcopalians, Lutherans and Presbyterians -- categorized as "mainline" Protestants, in contrast to evangelicals. Just over three in 10 of them said torture is never justified. A quarter of the religiously unaffiliated said the same, compared with two in 10 white non-Hispanic Catholics and one in eight evangelicals.Now, I try my best to be ambivalent towards religion, but this is strong evidence that it's flat-out evil. This is not a question of euphemisms or language - they flat-out used the word "torture". Those who go to church were significantly more likely to support it than those who didn't, and evangelicals most of all. That's.....pretty damning, to be honest. And 49% for the general population is sickeningly high.

[Killer_Man_]

49% of what? 742?

To me, sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't. It's one of those half and half situations. Half reason that it would be good to gain information by torture.

The other half is my humane side who would think, it's not good to torture and I don't want to be tortured.

That being said, who gives a damn?

That's like saying some of the Muslims are terrorists and women rights suppressors.

[Gio Takahashi]

Just because a terrorist is suspected doesn't mean that person is guaranteed a terrorist, only suspect. How about innocent until proven guilty?

[Seegtease]

This is great evidence. Look at the specific groups! Look at the sample size! I better leave the church because I'm evil now!

Oh wait. They didn't ask my church. Wouldn't want to lower the statistic in the church's favor, so it's best they avoid it.

[Gerrymander]

Sensationalist fluff journalism at it's best.
Correlation =/= causation

Also. Where was the study done? How did they define 'torture'? 'Often' and 'sometimes' mean different things to different people.

The analysis is based on a Pew Research Center survey of 742 American adults conducted April 14-21. It did not include analysis of groups other than white evangelicals, white non-Hispanic Catholics, white mainline Protestants and the religiously unaffiliated, because the sample size was too small.

Yeesh.

[Arainach]

Too small to get tiny minorities, yes. 742 people is quite a reasonable sample size. And no one said causation.

[Bloodcinder]

Sensationalist fluff journalism at it's best.
Correlation =/= causation
This. They were all white people! At most they've shown that white people favor torture.

[Gerrymander]

Too small to get tiny minorities, yes. 742 people is quite a reasonable sample size. And no one said causation.

Now, I try my best to be ambivalent towards religion, but this is strong evidence that it's flat-out evil.

Yeah, you pretty much did.

[deathofcheese]

I don't find it that surprising, and highly ironic. But yeah, just because one study (and kinda small) finds a correlation doesn't mean you can make a universally quantified statement.

Besides, just because religion-affiliated people tend to think torture's ok doesn't necessarily mean that their religion thinks it's ok. If anything, it just suggests that a lot of "religious" people don't really follow their religion very well.

[Seegtease]

Yeah, you pretty much did.

Stole my post.

---------- Post added at 00:10 ---------- Previous post was at 00:08 ----------

If anything, it just suggests that a lot of "religious" people don't really follow their religion very well.


This too. But to me, this was always apparent.

[chefTENGU]

Wow, everyone has already gone through the trouble of pointing out the inherent flaws with the argument I was going to. Props to Seeg, Ron, Gerry, and DoC for posting exactly what I would have had I seen this topic sooner.

Although I do find this a tad disturbing. I wouldn't dismiss these findings outright, but rather they should be improved upon by being a little more specific with the groups they are targeting, as well as expanding the sample size to include more participants, with provisions to control for such potential factors as regional bias, ethnic bias, socioeconomic conditions, etc.

You could probably generate quite interesting data from an adequate sample size.

[Arainach]

I don't find it that surprising, and highly ironic. But yeah, just because one study (and kinda small) finds a correlation doesn't mean you can make a universally quantified statement.

Besides, just because religion-affiliated people tend to think torture's ok doesn't necessarily mean that their religion thinks it's ok. If anything, it just suggests that a lot of "religious" people don't really follow their religion very well.
The "it's still wrong with theory, don't blame the religion" claim goes to hell when 99.9% of your followers ignore the rules. In this case, a vast majority of people ignore the rules, which mean that the organization's beliefs are those of its people regardless of what purists will claim.

[Z]

Well we all know that 83.765% of statistics are made up on the spot.

In this case, a vast majority of people ignore the rules, which mean that the organization's beliefs are those of its peopleMany people in San Francisco drive cars. A sample group of those drivers are gay.
Therefore if you drive a car in San Francisco, you are gay?

Many people label themselves as Christian. A sample group of those people who label themselves as Christian support torture.
Therefore if you support Christianity, you support torture?

[chefTENGU]

The "it's still wrong with theory, don't blame the religion" claim goes to hell when 99.9% of your followers ignore the rules. In this case, a vast majority of people ignore the rules, which mean that the organization's beliefs are those of its people regardless of what purists will claim.
Granted, but you can't really apply that here. Considering that the sample size was only around 750 individuals, and they tried to get some variation to the religions they were polling, I'd estimate that the survey results only reflect a small portion in one or two congregations for the groups they tried to test.

That being the case, the results can hardly be considered representative of any of those religions as a whole, merely of some portion of individual congregations of those religions. THAT being the case, it's not so hard to imagine that the congregation might be skewed to a particular perspective, depending on the pastor.

Which is one of the troubles of belonging to a globe-spanning religion. Everyone's going to have their own biases and opinions, regardless of objective authority.

[deathofcheese]

So, since some Catholic priests and other clergy (and this isn't limited to Catholicism either) have been known to favor and act out with young boys, does this now mean that the Catholic church condones and encourages pedophilia?

[dinowoman]

I've come to this discussion rather late - people have already pointed out the observations I would have made, such as correllation =/= causation and the inadequate size of the sample, considering it was spread across a fairly wide selection of denominations. And I'm not a statistician, but I don't see the percentage difference between those who do and those who don't go to church as very significant. One is slightly over half and one is slightly under half. Not a big enough difference to be very meaningful, I'd have thought. Even so, I must say I find the percentages rather shocking. Given that Christ taught the need for love (including love for ones enemies) I'd like to know how people who call themselves Christians can support torture. At the risk of appearing holier than thou (not my intention at all) I would be very surprised to find any members of the church I go to who supported torture. (Apart from which, how can torture be useful for gaining reliable information? If the person is weak, they'll say whatever their interrogator wants to hear to make the pain stop, whether it's true or not, and if they've been trained to withstand it, they won't talk anyway.)

[Seegtease]

^ That too.

[Sunflower]

Kinda off topic but has to do with torture - something I don't understand is why Obama and others who wanted to release information from the CIA about the interrogation techniques they thought were tortuhttp://www.unitedempire.net/forums/images/editor/separator.gifre thought that was okay, but now that the secrets are out they won't release information about whether it was effective and saved lives ? Also, it looks like the speaker of the house has been caught lying about what she knew about everthing.

[chefTENGU]

Also, it looks like the speaker of the house has been caught lying about what she knew about everthing.
I've never met anyone who's liked Nancy Pelosi. She's a horrible mega-bitch (and you can ask my uncle for a first-hand account of just how horrible she is). I don't know how she's managed to remain in office.

[Arainach]

Don't ask me, I hate her too. She's the #2 reason (behind that spineless motherfucker Reid) why the Democrats haven't gotten anything done in the last 3 years.

[Z]

I've never met anyone who's liked Nancy Pelosi. She's a horrible mega-bitch (and you can ask my uncle for a first-hand account of just how horrible she is). I don't know how she's managed to remain in office.
:qft: