This website has been around for a little over 2 weeks, and it’s already attracted a lot of attention. So I thought it might be fun to take the pulse of the readership with a few poll questions….
-
Archives
- August 2019
- July 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
-
Meta
So, where are the questions? I read and enjoy it. ◄Dave►
Just us libertarian atheists up at 1 AM on a Sunday.
So most readers of secularright.org consider themselves to be secular right. Interesting..
The somewhat fluid nature of terms related to political affiliation (such as conservative, Liberal, Libertarian, etc.) – particularly in a non-intellectually-active land that’s governed by a two-party system – makes such polls on a blog such as this rather useful.
I would consider myself a “biology-based conservative” inasmuch as I believe that it would be wise for human society to be structured in such a way as best biologically fits our temperaments. Surprisingly, this has me cast myself in one of the above polls as a “social conservative”, despite my rather strong intellectual bent against the superstitions of what we call the “Christian Right”.
In short, my policy preferences are perhaps the precise opposite of most of the other Secular Right bloggers whom I’ve come across – my policy preferences are socially conservative and economically liberal. I believe that more of my fellow citizens would live happier, healthier and longer lives were the powers of the wealthy curtailed and were traditional family values encouraged. Any allies here? Anyone…?
As a libertarian, I consider “left” and “right” at best meaningless and at worst misleading as a characterization of my views, so I only answered the first question.
Under the belief in god question, I’d like an option along the lines of: don’t care, apathetic, etc.
If you could eliminate corruption and other aspects of human nature I would tend to agree with you on the economic aspect of this. However, there are certain aspects of the human condition that will lead to abuse and a worse functioning system when you concentrate that much economic power (and consequently control) in the hands of the government.
On the first question I would have preferred an option of “Likely None.” Yeah, yeah. If you tried to cater to everyone’s particulars, the choices list would be a mile long. I know.
mnuez
In Dr. Hughes book, he postulates the 2D liberal/conservative axis morphing into a cube, with an additional axis of biopolitics.
I think I would describe myself as a democratic transhumanist. 😉
and…umm…actually religious belief is good for homosapiens sapiens. Or it wouldn’t be hardwired.
In the EEA religions encouraged reproductive and survival fitness by spreading tribal membership benefits to a wider memetic tribe.
Religion mandates benevolent behavior towards tribal members.
The base problem is religion has to be completely separate from government.
That is the problem with the socons, that they believe their particular morality should be legislated.
Ouch. Not many non-believing social conservatives.
Sounds like Voltaire was right — you do want your wife, servants, and neighbors to be Christian, if you don’t want to be cuckolded, robbed, etc.
I see… NoScript had the polls obscured for me the first time. Why is there not an Up and Down instead of only the Left and Right wings of the Incumbrepublocrats?
That profound observation is from his “A Time for Choosing” speech at the Republican convention in ’64. It allows one to notice that center field, inhabited by libertarians, centrists, and moderates is the principled position of those who value Liberty. ◄Dave►
Um, DH/Razib… On an earlier post you referred to libertarianism as a flavour of liberalism (no, I know that’s not an exact quote); here you’ve got it down as one of your ‘right wing’ options. How does that cut? Do you see libertarianism as a right-wing liberalism, or are there both left- and right-wing libertarians, or are labels like ‘liberal’ and ‘libertarian’ independent of left- or right-wingism, or what?
How about libertarian atheist??
I’d like a third category of “philosophical left/right” added to “secular left/right” and “religious left/right”. I am a Catholic, and I answered “religious right”, but this implies that my political views derive from my religious views. In fact, my political views would not change even if I stopped being a Catholic and depend on philosophically defensible positions (I hope!), not religious faith.
The problem I see here is that “secular” defines itself in opposition to religion, and “religion” defines itself in opposition to the secular. Where is the possible common ground? There’s got to be a third alternative, a space that allows the secular and the religious to talk to each on commonly agreed principles… I think that ground will be found in philosophy or not at all.
Any allies here? Anyone…?
I clicked social conservative.
The problem I see here is that “secular” defines itself in opposition to religion, and “religion” defines itself in opposition to the secular.
I think it is totally possible to be a secular conservative and religious. An evangelical Christian friend told me that he felt that way himself. His political arguments were not strongly shaped by religious arguments (though obviously his religion informs).
On an earlier post you referred to libertarianism as a flavour of liberalism (no, I know that’s not an exact quote); here you’ve got it down as one of your ‘right wing’ options. How does that cut?
American conservatism/Right is to a large extent by some readings just a variety of classical liberalism. I’m not making this out of whole cloth, you can read about it in books about American political history and theory.
I think it is totally possible to be a secular conservative and religious. An evangelical Christian friend told me that he felt that way himself. His political arguments were not strongly shaped by religious arguments (though obviously his religion informs).
@David Hume
I think the term we are missing here is “anti-clerical”. Most people nowadays seem to think it means “anti-religious” or at least “non-religious”, but the definition “opposed to the influence of religious thinking on government policy” would be more useful. Historically it means something like “opposed to the influence of churches on government policy”.
Now it sounds like you’re using “secular” to mean “opposed to (or not in favor of) the influence of religious thinking on government policy” where I would use it to mean “non-religious”. I’m not saying your usage is wrong and mine is right, but I think we should be clearer on these things.
Now it sounds like you’re using “secular” to mean “opposed to (or not in favor of) the influence of religious thinking on government policy” where I would use it to mean “non-religious”. I’m not saying your usage is wrong and mine is right, but I think we should be clearer on these things.
Let me be specific: I joined this weblog in large part because so many times when I brought up evolutionary ideas with relevance for social thought in conservative forums people would just assert that modern science had disproved evolution. This impulse isn’t really a “religious argument” as such; it’s more of a social-cultural tribal reflex with roots in American Protestant evangelicalism which has now expanded to nearly 1/2 of the population. Similarly, starting from Thomistic reasoning as the point of departure in a discussion with those who don’t accept Thomistic reasoning is also problematic.
I had to choose “can’t know” for answer one. For a longer answer, I self-describe as agnostic for several reasons.
But knowledge is impossible only in two select cases. If a god exists and wants to remain hidden we will never know of its existence if it’s halfway worthy of the title. If no god exists, only perfect knowledge will show that conclusively (but that seems to be impossible). Knowledge is certainly possible if a god exists and reveals itself to us (or would do so if it encountered us).
Of course, intellectual interest aside, there is no functional difference between a god that does not exist and one that stays perfectly hidden. This fact is at the root of my religious belief, summed up as “Think agnostic, live atheist.”
@David Hume
That is indeed clear. Incidentally, it is about the same reason I am here.
Blode0322:
David Hume has responded as to his own position, but I do think the collective thrust of this blog as a whole (i.e. reader comments included) has been largely oppositional so far. That’s seems like a real trap to me. I, personally, am not anti-religious, but I wouldn’t call myself “anti-clerical” when described as ““opposed to the influence of religious thinking on government policy.” I am opposed to religious justifications for government policy — something that is far easier to identify than “religious thinking” or “influence.” Such a position doesn’t necessarily imply opposition to religion itself, which I consider an added political virtue, since I am opposed to anti-religious justifications for policy too.
I voted “possibly” in the first poll because I am more of a deist than an atheist or agnostic. However, I didn’t vote in the second or third polls because though I am a libertarian, I do not consider myself a member of the right. I have much in common with members of the fringes of the both the right (like Pat Buchannan and Steve Sailer) and left (Alexander Cockburn, for example).
I, personally, am not anti-religious, but I wouldn’t call myself “anti-clerical” when described as ““opposed to the influence of religious thinking on government policy.” I am opposed to religious justifications for government policy — something that is far easier to identify than “religious thinking” or “influence.”
@JM Hanes
To sum up: You’re okay with the thinking that goes into policymaking having religious (or secular) roots, but the justifications for policies should be neutral to religion. Is that about right?
A nuanced point, and probably not one I’d like to try to get across at a cocktail party! But I think I see where you’re coming from and I tend to agree. To wit: it’s fine if your deity or your bishop puts a thought in your head regarding how people and groups should act, but you should leave the religious stuff out when pitching your idea to the rest of the world.
I hereby commission someone to come up with a name for JM Hanes’ viewpoint. Payment will be my eternal esteem.
I’m just a do-gooder lefty who believes we need to be ready to kick ass when necessary.
How about Piously Incorrect? I regard personal morality to be beyond the purview of the Federal government. I see both the Politically Correct moralists on the Left, and the Piously Correct moralists on the Right, as essentially religious movements. Their adherents are free to practice their PC moral codes among themselves, but have no business petitioning government to enforce their dogma on sovereign individuals who are not.
It is painful to watch otherwise rational political candidates have to twist themselves into pretzels over the litmus tests these two competing religious camps foist on them, in order to try to placate one without alienating the other, over ancillary moral issues that essentially have nothing to do with good government. I do not appreciate being confronted with obvious evidence that a candidate is lying, when I would prefer to vote for someone that is honest. In today’s climate, an honest citizen cannot ever be elected to high office. More the pity. ◄Dave►
Blode0322:
“I hereby commission someone to come up with a name for JM Hanes’ viewpoint. “
Separation of church and state?
It is good to see based on the comments that I’m not the only religious person who considers himself a secular conservative.
Libertarianism is confined to the right?
@Tony Comstock
I think people around here use “libertarianism” as shorthand for “right libertarianism”. Make sense?
It would if the previous poll hadn’t offered a wider range of choices. No exclusive claim on secular or religious by the right in the previous poll questions. I’m wondering if we’re not on the eve of a big shift in the left/right paradigm that’s dominated our politics.