NY times calls for criminal prosecution of Cheney and others.

[Hayabusa Rider]

I imagine this has a lot more to do with partisan ID than religion, but that should put to rest the idea of religion as being a necessary basis for morality

The morality argument is much more complex and I don't think this says anything about the origins of morality. What I would say it that it's completely possible to believe one is religious, believe God possesses an objective metric while being a complete murderous asshole. It also shows a lack of understanding of their religion (assuming "religious" means Christian) or such hypocrisy that whatever virtues theoretically espoused are entirely nullified by what such people actually embrace. I am not impressed by such people.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Wrong again, it's actually a reproduction of the Washington Post's own breakout as shown on their website.

So now that you've accepted that the Post is a credible source for this are you either going to declare them to have an agenda or actually discuss the disturbing correlation?

Maddow blog...lol, nice source! Incredibly biased attempt to denigrate the religious duly noted.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

This is a repugnantly dishonest post. You're implying that torturing detainees is the essential reason that Al Qaeda didn't strike NYC again, that all other U.S. actions post-911 were essentially irrelevant in the fight against international terrorism. You're implying that NOT torturing detainees would have amounted to a green light to Al Qaeda.

This is your version of reality?

Well that isn't surprising. Cheney has no credibility with it comes to speaking truth. I'd love (from a perspective of personal amusement) to see his justification of Cheney's claim that Saddam had significant ties with Al Qaeda for ten years, or the lies about the aluminum tubes which the administration was told beforehand were useless for that purpose by Sandia. Oh, the yellowcake forgeries. On and on and on.

These marvelous "revelations of truth" (my quotes) certainly saved NYC from another attack, which is too bad it seems, because glenn and Cheney have a unique appreciation for fiction and misleading the public.

Another day and nothing changes.

 

[fskimospy]

Maddow blog...lol, nice source! Incredibly biased attempt to denigrate the religious duly noted.

You are embarrassing yourself. I suggest you go read my other post. The data in the linked chart is an exact reproduction of a tab from the Washington post that I already linked to. Additionally, support for torture from religious whites exceeds that from all whites anyway.

Your own bias is preventing you from processing uncomfortable facts. Then add on the fact that you're then pretending to be outraged on the behalf of the religious. The only outrageous thing here is your continuing attempt to smear those who make you look at uncomfortable facts.

 

[fskimospy]

The morality argument is much more complex and I don't think this says anything about the origins of morality. What I would say it that it's completely possible to believe one is religious, believe God possesses an objective metric while being a complete murderous asshole. It also shows a lack of understanding of their religion (assuming "religious" means Christian) or such hypocrisy that whatever virtues theoretically espoused are entirely nullified by what such people actually embrace. I am not impressed by such people.

That was kind of my point. Christianity is founded in the event of the torture and murder of Jesus by the state. It is somewhat sad and ironic that followers of that religion are more likely than average to support such measures.

I think it comes down to political ideology. Christians are more likely to be conservatives and conservatives are more likely to approve of torture. It's just interesting to see that politics trumps God.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

You are embarrassing yourself. I suggest you go read my other post. The data in the linked chart is an exact reproduction of a tab from the Washington post that I already linked to. Additionally, support for torture from religious whites exceeds that from all whites anyway.

Your own bias is preventing you from processing uncomfortable facts. Then add on the fact that you're then pretending to be outraged on the behalf of the religious. The only outrageous thing here is your continuing attempt to smear those who make you look at uncomfortable facts.

Why single out religious whites? Why not single out religious blacks or religious Asians as well? I'm sure you have a perfectly rational answer.

 

[sandorski]

Why single out religious whites? Why not single out religious blacks or religious Asians as well? I'm sure you have a perfectly rational answer.

Why does that matter if the Data is accurate?

 

[fskimospy]

Why single out religious whites? Why not single out religious blacks or religious Asians as well? I'm sure you have a perfectly rational answer.

So I assume this is a tacit admission that the chart was not a creation of an 'incredibly biased blogger' but instead a linkable reproduction of the primary source? Considering your repeated attempts to assert the dishonesty of the source, claim I was taking a cheap shot at religion using a biased source, etc, that certainly merits a mention, no?

I have no idea why they broke it out that way but it doesn't matter for the reason I already mentioned. Even within a single ethnic group religious white people are more likely to support torture than white people as a whole. In some cases a lot more. That's damning for an ethos that is supposed to make you a better person.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Nothing will happen,.. and good.

Just like my heart does not bleed when a drug dealer gets his head caved in for not dropping his gun, it will not bleed when someone who fired an RPG at our soldiers gets drowned and revived.

I would like to put aside these stupid double standards nonetheless (i.e. we don't call it torture) - however, not that many people will own up to that. I pity the persons who will try to "set things right".

I terms of innocents tortured, that does indeed need to be addressed and remedied. But, taking extra super caution & care with someone who is willing to die in order to kill you, fuck that.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Why does that matter if the Data is accurate?

 

[glenn1]

This is a repugnantly dishonest post. You're implying that torturing detainees is the essential reason that Al Qaeda didn't strike NYC again, that all other U.S. actions post-911 were essentially irrelevant in the fight against international terrorism. You're implying that NOT torturing detainees would have amounted to a green light to Al Qaeda.

This is your version of reality?

No, I'm saying had New York got hit again its residents would have been leading the demands for torture or whatever else they thought would make the attacks stop.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Wrong again, it's actually a reproduction of the Washington Post's own breakout as shown on their website.

So now that you've accepted that the Post is a credible source for this are you either going to declare them to have an agenda or actually discuss the disturbing correlation?

The graphic you posted was created by Steve Benen who used selective data from the Washington Post poll. Steve Benen is the Producer of the Rachel Maddow Show. You've given me crap about my sources before without regard for the validity of the data presented...surely you, of all people, understand my confusion when you reject your own advice.

 

[fskimospy]

The graphic you posted was created by Steve Benen who used selective data from the Washington Post poll. Steve Benen is the Producer of the Rachel Maddow Show. You've given me crap about my sources before without regard for the validity of the data presented...surely you, of all people, understand my confusion when you reject your own advice.

I have to say this is the first time I've ever seen someone argue that reproducing an exact tab created by the primary source itself, the Washington Post, that was designed to be viewed by itself and making it a linkable graphic is 'using selective data'.

The fact that you're trying to argue this point explains a lot about why you might link to such bad sources. You think copying crosstabs from a primary source means its coming from a biased source because of the name on the graphic. You are most certainly confused, but not about what you think, haha.

It's quite clear you never looked at the poll to see that and are now just digging in your heels instead of admitting it. You said something dumb and tried to impugn multiple people's motives instead of admitting fault. Just be a man and own up to it.

The takeaway is that identification with those three religious groups makes you more likely to support torture, all else being equal. If you think there is something misleading about the takeaway of that tab from the primary source, please explain exactly what is misleading about it and back it up with other data from the poll. Be specific.

 

[Jhhnn]

These marvelous "revelations of truth" (my quotes) certainly saved NYC from another attack,

Mere assertion in support of their actions in a round about way.

You already knew that, right?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I have to say this is the first time I've ever seen someone argue that reproducing an exact tab created by the primary source itself, the Washington Post, that was designed to be viewed by itself and making it a linkable graphic is 'using selective data'.

The fact that you're trying to argue this point explains a lot about why you might link to such bad sources. You think copying crosstabs from a primary source means its coming from a biased source because of the name on the graphic. You are most certainly confused, but not about what you think, haha.

It's quite clear you never looked at the poll to see that and are now just digging in your heels instead of admitting it. You said something dumb and tried to impugn multiple people's motives instead of admitting fault. Just be a man and own up to it.

The takeaway is that identification with those three religious groups makes you more likely to support torture, all else being equal. If you think there is something misleading about the takeaway of that tab from the primary source, please explain exactly what is misleading about it and back it up with other data from the poll. Be specific.

Challenge accepted. Educated people are more likely to support torture.

 

[Moonbeam]

Would you please have a look at what sacred cow you are trying to protect. You couldn't be practicing the deflection and denial I am seeing happening here without reason. Some very vital assumption that is essential to your world view has to be threatened here. I think you must be protecting something you think is good to protect the good, that if you are wrong in the detail you are wrong in the principle. The good is. It doesn't depend on what we think. There is nothing of value that one can lose. I lost everything and the good still won. Trust in the good and that it exists independently of belief.

 

[Moonbeam]

No, I'm saying had New York got hit again its residents would have been leading the demands for torture or whatever else they thought would make the attacks stop.

And this justifies what, exactly.

 

[sandorski]

Got a point to make or are you just tarding out?

 

[fskimospy]

Challenge accepted. Educated people are more likely to support torture.

That wasn't my challenge at all, but nice try.

Additionally, what support are you seeing for that in the poll numbers? Both categories with a college degree are less likely than average to support torture.

 

[Moonbeam]

Nothing will happen,.. and good.

Just like my heart does not bleed when a drug dealer gets his head caved in for not dropping his gun, it will not bleed when someone who fired an RPG at our soldiers gets drowned and revived.

I would like to put aside these stupid double standards nonetheless (i.e. we don't call it torture) - however, not that many people will own up to that. I pity the persons who will try to "set things right".

I terms of innocents tortured, that does indeed need to be addressed and remedied. But, taking extra super caution & care with someone who is willing to die in order to kill you, fuck that.

You see that improperly. The proper way to say that is "Fuck me, to be like you I will kill anything that gives life meaning, and at the top of the list, my own humanity."

 

[Omar F1]

They're murderous terrorist pieces of shit. What's the problem? Those responsible for 9/11 have been shown more mercy than I would have given them. Torture away!

"Those responsible for 9/11" now this is the true and real issue for that disaster, which been for both, the American and the Arabs world.

 

[Jhhnn]

Too bad you don't understand why you don't post that in an Obamacare thread... And why it doesn't belong here at all.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Would you please have a look at what sacred cow you are trying to protect. You couldn't be practicing the deflection and denial I am seeing happening here without reason. Some very vital assumption that is essential to your world view has to be threatened here. I think you must be protecting something you think is good to protect the good, that if you are wrong in the detail you are wrong in the principle. The good is. It doesn't depend on what we think. There is nothing of value that one can lose. I lost everything and the good still won. Trust in the good and that it exists independently of belief.

What sacred cow do you imagine I'm trying to protect? There is little doubt in my mind that religious whites are more likely than most to believe torture is justifiable in certain cases. I also believe that this is true for religious blacks, Asians, Hispanics, etc. as well. However, the poll fails to cover these particular demographics nor even a catch-all non-white religious demographic for that matter...which I find quite odd considering the data granularity surrounding white religious affiliations. Unfortunately, this makes it impossible to determine just how much the color of one's skin affects one's "hypocrisy" among the religious. A damn shame, don't you think?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

That wasn't my challenge at all, but nice try.

Additionally, what support are you seeing for that in the poll numbers? Both categories with a college degree are less likely than average to support torture.

73% of college grads believe torture is justified (rarely, sometimes, or often), only 21% believe it is never justified.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/...uestion_15190.xml?uuid=NsiPKocMEeSrz1o9ezsguA

 

[fskimospy]

73% of college grads believe torture is justified (rarely, sometimes, or often), only 21% believe it is never justified.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/...uestion_15190.xml?uuid=NsiPKocMEeSrz1o9ezsguA

73% of college grads that support torture is less than the average of all adults. (77%)

Although it is more than the HS or less category (73%), it is less than the some college category (84%). It's unclear how you would draw the conclusion that an increase in education meant greater support for torture from that data.

Regardless, even if that were true about education, what's your point? If the data pointed that way I certainly wouldn't accuse you of smearing the university crowd.