link ITHACA, N.Y. - Nearly half of all Americans believe the U.S. government should restrict the civil liberties of Muslim Americans, according to a nationwide poll. The survey conducted by Cornell University also found that Republicans and people who described themselves as highly religious were more apt to support curtailing Muslims' civil liberties than Democrats or people who are less religious. Researchers also found that respondents who paid more attention to television news were more likely to fear terrorist attacks and support limiting the rights of Muslim Americans. "It's sad news. It's disturbing news. But it's not unpredictable," said Mahdi Bray, executive director of the Muslim American Society. "The nation is at war, even if it's not a traditional war. We just have to remain vigilant and continue to interface." The survey found 44 percent favored at least some restrictions on the civil liberties of Muslim Americans. Forty-eight percent said liberties should not be restricted in any way. The survey showed that 27 percent of respondents supported requiring all Muslim Americans to register where they lived with the federal government. Twenty-two percent favored racial profiling to identify potential terrorist threats. And 29 percent thought undercover agents should infiltrate Muslim civic and volunteer organizations to keep tabs on their activities and fund-raising. Cornell student researchers questioned 715 people in the nationwide telephone poll conducted this fall. The margin of error was 3.6 percentage points. James Shanahan, an associate professor of communications who helped organize the survey, said the results indicate "the need for continued dialogue about issues of civil liberties" in a time of war. While researchers said they were not surprised by the overall level of support for curtailing civil liberties, they were startled by the correlation with religion and exposure to television news. "We need to explore why these two very important channels of discourse may nurture fear rather than understanding," Shanahan said. According to the survey, 37 percent believe a terrorist attack in the United States is still likely within the next 12 months. In a similar poll conducted by Cornell in November 2002, that number stood at 90 percent. _______________ Just stating the obvious, pretty much.
Cabbage... you're not supposed to be down here? run away! FWIW, it was beliefs that got the terrorism thing going. How are our beliefs different in respect to the branch-Davidians? It has to be curtailed, sometimes. You can believe in anything you want. But, just like freedom of speech has boundaries, so does freedom of religion.
Apparently 44% of people surveyed have forgotten the ideals that this nation was founded upon. I'm glad that only 22-29% favored racial profiling, requiring them to register where they live, or infiltrating their societies, but that's still too high a percentage. Have we not learned from out internment of the Japanese or the opression by the Germans of others during WW II -- because that's what the registration sounds a lot like? Have we not learned from the injustices of the middle of the last century when it comes to profiling? It's ridiculous. I'm only a little surprised at the political breakdown of the numbers, though, judging off of the current political climate. Nor am I the religious breakdown; throughout history, some of our greatest (not the good version of the word) wars were started or fought as a result of disagreements over something religious. But, it shouldn't matter what affiliation, whether political or religious, when it comes to an issue like this: I just don't think there's any excuse for it whatsoever. Work needs to be done to ensure civil liberties are protected for ALL while background checks are done on ALL people in high level positions or entering/leaving the nation. It's narrow-minded to think that a white caucasian may not someday be involved in one of these plans, partially because it's been reported that those are the types of people terrorists are recruiting.
That article is truly sad. Maybe my viewpoint is skewed by the fact that I am a Muslim. It is inherently un-American to make people register with the federal government just because they practice a certain faith. It takes the 1st Amendment and throws it out the window. I will be the first to say that there are bad Muslims in the world today, but that miniscule percentage certainly does not define the Muslim population as a whole nor does it define the religion. People have killed in the name of religion throughout history and I am ashamed of the fact that supposed followers of my religion are screwing its teachings to justify terror and murder. It doesn't surprise me that Republicans are more prevalent in holding this view than the rest. I think its fair to say that intolerance and hatred are more prevalent amongst the red states because of lack of exposure. Most people in those states have never seen a Muslim or talked to a Muslim. The only exposure to Islam that they have is watching Al-Qaeda on TV and listening to people like Hannity and Limbaugh. When I converted to Islam, I was probably the only Muslim in Northern Alabama. That being the case, I don't blame them at all for holding the views that they do. As far as the highly religious, if the article defines "highly religious" as being the religious right, then that doesn't surprise me at all. People like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and Franklin Graham thrive on villainizing Muslims everywhere. Muslims really need to reach out to people to show that all Muslims are not evil. If Muslims do not, then this is a battle that they will lose. Those numbers will grow. If Muslims don't get involved, then a time will come when Muslims will no longer welcome in American society, and that will be a tragic time for American Muslims like myself.
Freedom of Religion does have boundaries, provided those boundaries are objective. If Christians, Muslims, Jews, and Hindus each have a different set of boundaries, then that's un-American.
The boundaries should be equal, but that does not necessarily mean that members of the different religions will be equally affected. If there is one particular religion that has a significantly higher percentage of members who are out to fight the state and members of other religions, then the outcome might be that followers of that religion will, on average, be more affected by the boundaries than followers of other religions.
This is a tricky issue. An extreme scenario definitely exists so that perhaps all members of a certain religion be more restricted in some way for the good of the country. But we haven't reached that point yet. We aren't even close right now. That's what makes the article sad. That people could lose so much objectivity due to unreasonable fear.
sure you ban people who are against the state. you jail people who are against the jail. you curtail rights of people who are against the state. and if that means more muslims go to jail thats fine. however this article is stating that 44% of american's beileve the rights of a specific religious group should be curtailed due to the fact that there are a number of people within the group who are against the state. your logic is completely different from the viewpoint expressed by these people. you curtail rights of those individuals. and if they happen to belong to a certain religious group tough luck. however you do not curtail the rights of the religious group because they happened to contain certain people.
What do "some restrictions on the civil liberties of Muslim Americans" mean specifically? What was the exact question asked that got this response? Interesting that they left that part out... 27% 22% and 29%?? Since when are those numbers "nearly half" as the article states? Really??? Where are these numbers? I've read the article several times and I must have missed them. I guess it doesn't really matter anyway because everyone knows that Republicans are meanies and perception is more important that reality. No reply necessary... I love how everyone in this thread reads this article, takes it as the gospel and immediately comes to the conclusion that America is "intolerant" (especially those EVIL Republicans) and how "sad" it is. Assuming that this survey is valid (and you know what they say about assuming) it seems to be saying that less than 30% of Americans are in favor of curtailing the civil liberties of Muslim Americans. Less than 30%. How is that "sad"?
Great post. What is "sad" is the state of politics today where a person will take any info that supports their ideas to insult the opposition regardless of the accuracy of the data. I guess rationalizing your "team" is more important than working toward a united America.
Wanting to restrict an American's rights because of his religion is just as stupid as wanting to restrict an American's rights because of his race. America is great *because* of our differences, not in spite of.
Actually, reply is quite necessary Zog-boy as you seem to have missed some key points. All those numbers mean is that over 44% of people chose at least one of those three. I didn't find that hard to discern. But in the time it took you to type that post, you could have just googled your way over here: http://www.comm.cornell.edu/msrg/report1a.pdf and then you could do some actual critiquing of methodology. But you were too busy playing martyr. Oh, Poooooooooor Republicans never get a fair shake. With all this persecution they suffer, it's amazing that they control the White house, Senate, House, major media outlets, etc etc etc.
or perhaps it goes to show that if even insane men can have such positions...its scary that 44% of americans dont.
