Survey: Religiously unaffiliated, minority Christians propelled Obama’s victory
A quarter of President Barack Obama's supporters were religiously unaffiliated, the Public Religion Research Institute says.
November 15th, 2012
02:24 PM ET

Survey: Religiously unaffiliated, minority Christians propelled Obama’s victory

By Dan Merica, CNN

Washington (CNN) - President Barack Obama’s victory relied largely on two dramatically different religious coalitions - minority Christians and those with no religion according to a survey released Thursday.

“This presidential election is the last in which a white Christian strategy will be considered a plausible path to victory,” said Robert P. Jones, CEO of the Public Religion Research Institute, which conducted the survey. “The American religious and ethnic landscape is becoming increasingly diverse, and any campaigns relying on outdated maps are destined to lose their way.”

One-in-four Obama voters were religiously unaffiliated, the second-largest “religious” demographic in the president’s coalition, according to the study (PDF). Minority Christians - consisting of black, Asian, Hispanic and mixed-race Americans made up 31% of Obama’s coalition, the largest religious group.

Among major religious demographics, Obama struggled most with white Christians, including Catholics, mainline Protestants and evangelical Protestants. When these three groups were added up, they accounted for just 35% of Obama’s religious coalition. In comparison, Republican challenger Mitt Romney’s coalition was overwhelmingly white and Christian, with 79% of Romney voters identifying as such.

The Public Religion Research Institute numbers flesh out exit polls released after Election Day. According to those numbers, 70% of the religiously unaffiliated supported Obama, compared with 26% who backed Romney. Ninety-five percent of black Protestants voted for Obama, according to the exit polls, while 75% of Hispanic Catholics supported the president.

Romney, according to the exit polls, overwhelmingly won white evangelical Christians (79% voted for him) and white Catholics (59% voted for him).

The rise of the religiously unaffiliated has been a major recent trend. A survey by Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life released this year found that the fastest-growing "religious" group in America is made up of people with no religion at all. According to the survey, 20% of adult Americans have no religious affiliation.

At an event announcing the Pew results, senior research adviser John Green said the growing political power of the unaffiliated within the Democratic Party could become similar to the power the religious right acquired in the GOP in the 1980s.

The 2012 election results have some political experts questioning whether the religious right’s influence is fading.

The Rev. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, tweeted after the election that the results show “we are witnessing a fundamental moral realignment of the country.”

Conservative evangelist Franklin Graham, CEO of Samaritan’s Purse and son of the Rev. Billy Graham, told CNN that while he doesn’t believe the movement is fading, “there is a lot of work we need to do.”

“I just think there are a lot of conservative Christians who did not vote for whatever reason,” Franklin Graham said.

Like Graham, Jones said the legalization of same-sex marriage by ballot initiative in three states last week shows that America is changing.

“For the first time tonight, same-sex marriage has been passed by popular vote in Maine and Maryland,” Jones said last week. “The historic nature of these results are hard to overstate. Given the strong support of younger Americans for same-sex marriage, it is unlikely this issue will reappear as a major national wedge issue.”

The results of the Public Religion Research Institute survey were based on 1,410 telephone interviews in both Spanish and English conducted between November 7 and Sunday. The poll's margin of error is plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.

- CNN’s Dan Gilgoff contributed to this report.

- Dan Merica

Filed under: 2012 Election • Barack Obama • Catholic Church • Christianity • Faith • Politics • Same-sex marriage

soundoff (1,305 Responses)
  1. lionlylamb

    A scattering is upon us in these trying days and Age. Leave your wantings behind and never take wind of one's longings for the weightiness of one's longings will smite even the most influential. Carry away nothing and leave. Head to the places inside one's being and do not keep ajar your door for many will want to enter in and should not. Your loving this Life is for the world to have and you should not heed the rumors from others as to just what is truly right. It is therefore best for mankind to simmer in their juvenile pottages never rationalizingly 'assaying' one's diffuse detriments, the very smallest of life's grains. As smitten breeds, our splendors reveal one's characters to be traitorous to one's analogous fold. Where then does Life end and living begin?

    Who before this day's Age is found worthy of Goodly praises? Who after us will find peace set before them? Who in today;s timeline is this "son of man" that many should fear him for his worthiness stance? Who above can see the below? Who that is below can see what be above? From the very smallest crevice to the most high chasms, the Sea of Nothingness is the Holy Spirit. May the elemental Gods find favor in this found son of man that he may not be afflicted with this world's power but rather he should carry upon him the angst from his manhood till his natural death.

    What I spiritually believe in is that the Families of God including God Himself lives upon the very first created Cosmos which is the inner Cosmos. Our being but upon this celestial cosmos is due our being cast out of the Inner Cosmos for many reasons. Some were cast out of this Inner Cosmos for faultering and some for continuing to do the Lord's Will here upon this celestial realm of gigantic life forms whereupon their insides are living many families of God's members. We live upon this realm doing what we want while many of us unify ourselves in the communal. My way is not your way and yet when we cross paths we receive each other and walk on.Therefore, walk placidly amid the noise and waste ever being mindful of the peace one finds in finding peace there about.

    Is God to be made a mockery by those who tend to instill anti-leveraged pragmatisms? Are we to believe in the godless and the ungodly who care little about the piecemeal subjectives' ordinates?
    Jesus, was the very first of many immeasurable 'elemental beings' and was in the Beginning an elemental king of all the elemental Gods. Jesus, in His cunning, did thru Chaos' manueverings, established the gravimetrical waves for the elementals to gather in broods thusly was formed the beginnings of celestial nebulas.
    As time did force the nebulas to progressively surround the gravimetric oscillations where from did come about galactic formations of the elementals' soundness. As systems of photonic elementals, the infinitesimal finite elemental Gods did shower the solarized systems with their embodied beings. And in the Now, we are but made from the photonic elementals' stillnesses, the stardusts of the Ages.
    My "Physicist" knows very well the quantum physicalities of natured atomic stimulations. I call this "Physicist" God. He has strewn His Sea of Nothingness with 'photogenitisms' or the stillness of the photons creating all manner of the first materials needed to become thru timeliness all the elementals' members of our declared Periodic Table of Materialized Photogenitis.
    Sciences are but the dreams dreamt and are atheists' treasure troves of good books they hardly ever do read, for many atheists aren't too bright yet they stand by these scientists without one iota of deniability to question science books that even the commoner seldom reads nor truly understands. Who among us knows about the 'Self-Similar Cosmological Paradigm'? Who among us truly understands that energy equals mass times light squared and its' true potential? What is the point in adoring scientific reasoning when one's IQ level can be counted on ten fingers?
    I feel a compelling want to tell you about some verses in Gospel scripture. Is it not written to above all things to seek firstly the "Kingdom of God". This said, have you ascribed to doing so? Where does one look to or towards in order to find that which we are told to seek as scripture does declare one to do?
    Mathew 6:33 "But seek ye first the kingdom of God."
    I've searched the Gospel writings and have found a single verse telling all who have found it as to the true and literal location of God's Kingdomly Domains!
    Luk 17:21 "The kingdom of God is inside you."
    I take Luke 17:21 quite literally and so should all who believe in One God and His One Son of perhaps oodles upon oodles of otherly Sons and Daughters too numerous to really expound upon! Christ is special because he was born to take upon his being the sins of those who were and then were also and of times yet to come! God's Kingdoms being inside us and within our ownliness bodies can also be associated with another verse of scripture ,,,,
    1Corinthians 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, [ye are] God's building.
    The just above verse does tell much more than just glimpsing over it could proclude! Our being labourers with God may well seem to give us all an equal footing with God and his aspirations for our betterment's sakes! His being our husbandry may well regard God as having a firm footing in our conceptions of childbirthing beyond mere genetic understandings!
    But in the aboveness verse, the very understanding that we or our bodies are God's buildings may well inspire one to disavow such a claim due one's foresightedness sakes and lacking of rationalisms' of credible resources. Yet, as I see things, we, our bodies are not only God established and God created buildings for the benefits of the Godly who reside inside of us, but are for our benefits for learning and understanding the precepts of "Fractal Cosmologies"!
    We have seen that which our bodies are made up of and they are of cellularized structures not "unlike" nebula structures in outer space places! These celestial nebula structures are yet a work-in-progress and our body-like buildings are a progress in the works!
    These words are revelations of my Faith as to my Godly understandings regarding the Kingdom Domains of God, his Sons and his Daughters and all forms and mannerisms of Life-ever-lasting principles and principalities of progressives!

    Written by God's Oldest Dreamer

    November 15, 2012 at 5:56 pm |
    • sam

      I am tooooooo sober for this.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:57 pm |
    • Sports Fan

      I am reminded of the longest NFL game ever played. 40 years ago on Christmas. Thrilling!

      November 15, 2012 at 6:01 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      I'm too high for this...

      November 15, 2012 at 7:02 pm |
    • Former Republican

      Another christard....move along

      November 15, 2012 at 9:40 pm |
    • MCR

      Just a tip: no one reads anything from total strangers that's more than about 4 lines long. If you want to post an essay and have anyone read it, it have to be in response to something someone else posted and at least marginally relevant. You're just taking up space with stuff like this. And no, I didn't read it.

      November 15, 2012 at 9:44 pm |
    • Jeff Williams

      """And no, I didn't read it."""

      Same here.

      November 16, 2012 at 9:24 am |
    • Shells

      Yeah, no, I didn't read it. I hit "page down" as soon as I saw it was scripture. I mean, why would I?

      I'm currently reading Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice" for the third or fourth time. If I paste in the text from the first three pages, would you read it? And then maybe you'd go out and buy the book, become a huge Jane Austen fan, read all her other books, read books about her and her books, join book clubs that discuss her books, and begin quoting her to all your family and friends?

      Didn't think so...

      November 18, 2012 at 1:22 pm |
  2. Belief Blog Bistro

    Happy Hour at the Belief Blog Bistro!

    Drink specials include:

    Tom Tom Collins (Gin)
    Apple Bush Martini (Gin or Vodka with Apple Liqueur)
    Lionly Libation (Scotch and Water)
    Hindu Hefeweizen (Beer)
    Sam Sazerac (Absinthe)
    Hawaii Paradise (Brandy)
    Soldier Singapore Sling (Gin)
    Akira Orange (Vodka)

    See you here!

    November 15, 2012 at 5:52 pm |
    • sam

      One of each, please...put it on my tab

      November 15, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
    • Sports Fan

      I will have a Hindu, and a Sam Sazerac for my friend sam here.

      November 15, 2012 at 6:03 pm |
    • sam

      Much obliged.

      November 15, 2012 at 6:08 pm |
  3. lionlylamb

    Are individual rights based on societal righteousness within the parameters of cultural soundness being the kindled line drawn and distanced by religious austerities? How far away from religious agendaships will the leveraging hierarchies be twained and marked as being mere factors of the mythological?

    Have the vesper pottages of humanism become complacently illiterate nowadays? Where then does the root-commodities of religious socialisms truly matter and 'riotizingly' materialize upon spatterings' irrational causations? I do shudder in the crowds' 'vespered' laments, for of crowded sarcasms does lay the tutors of indemnifications' coverings leaving no more the generosities of the lividness' trees of multi-faceted generalisms.

    Monotheisms do nowadays abound, for many variations of 'mono-isms' are but fetters, the bonds that do bind up and weigh shackled inward, towards errancies subjugated upon the propensities of root cause worthiness. The godless need the ungodly and vice versa and although goodly does prevail upon and thru all aberrancy, many are plated and some are filtrations while many are mere silhouettes. No one person should be upon another's backsides but raised by the shoulders of another to such heights as deemed wise, needed and sublimated. Goodness knows no boundaries yet many do not heed the goodly in others who share unendingly their deeded austerities.

    Monotheistic is what the gestations of ungodly and godless unwittingly portend they themself to be. They are their own gods so to profess and in their cu-mulative efforts they due themselves conjoin and gather their piecemeal subjugants forsaking all goodly 'proprietaries' relatively based in Godly characterizations. "I will not give in!" are the ungodly and godless stands even though they tend to belittle and make small their talking spheres of jubilation's acquitals. A pig knows only how to root and make rutts searching the grounds for its' nourishments. Are we all not but rooting for our source codes?

    November 15, 2012 at 5:47 pm |
    • HeavenSense

      Yeah sure. K.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
    • northern light

      Oh put a sock in it!

      November 15, 2012 at 8:19 pm |
    • Baba Booey


      November 16, 2012 at 1:40 am |
  4. SoldierOfConscience

    Philosophically, the federal government is becoming stronger with every administration. The people are not getting wise to this. Its like boiling a lobster.. put it into cold water and turn up the heat.

    The c0nst1tut10n calls for almost independent states, and the federal govt having enumerated powers not unlimited powers... Looks like the revolution was for naught, we have built our own King George in washinton DC. Of course we 'elect' him every now and then. or, big business does.

    November 15, 2012 at 5:38 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      also, this is exactly how the Na zis came to power. remember na zis were supposed to be a 'labor' party, its whole name includes 'workers party'.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:40 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      Now I'm stuck talking to myself...

      November 15, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
    • TTT

      Do we really want each state behaving like it's own country? 250 years ago a state like Virginia was big enough to be a country. But things change. People move much more often. Businesses rely on continuity...

      In addition, the const.itution is getting old. Things (like gun laws, for example) need to be re-evaluated.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:46 pm |
    • sam

      I find it truly amazing that you seem to have so little knowledge or grasp of any subject you bring up. There must be something you have a clue about. Are you good at making aluminum foil hats, to keep the government's evil secular brainwaves out?

      November 15, 2012 at 5:46 pm |
    • Nurses!! You've given MoldOfNonsense too much computer time today!!

      November 15, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" – Thomas Jefferson

      for the whole quote, see http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/The_tree_of_liberty...%28Quotation%29

      November 15, 2012 at 6:06 pm |
    • sam

      Holy shit, he knows how to copy/paste!!

      November 15, 2012 at 6:08 pm |
    • MCR

      This isn't the world of 200+ years ago. We are much more closely tied together economically than at earlier times in history and that's a product of technology and demographics that won't be reversed. What is a suitable govenment structure for one economic and technological environment is often utterly inappropriate for another.

      November 15, 2012 at 6:14 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      Paraphrasing reagan, "the government is not the solution, it is the problem". Just as it took this long for govt to grow to this size, it may take a long time to cut it down slowly without hurting people. But continually increasing the size if it is the wrong way to go,

      Regarding it being anachronistic, sorry.. Most matters can be resolved locally. Few issues have to be dealt with at a federal level.

      November 16, 2012 at 5:58 am |
  5. lionlylamb

    Though the world will ever turn, people will ever become hardened and stall out of their storied' condescending aptness to unendingly fall abruptly into their cunningless crevices each and every time they dare rise up singularly, all the while such meandering pluralisms needs are to be counted out and upon, for only the sanctioned diplomacies of tactile pluralities are ever to be heard in chantings' rythms. The wasted fields of singular-isms decides nothing. No one individual can barter against the flocked masses, those jealous mobs of societal imbitterment. We are never alone but are always a oneness never to be sought out via the constraining giants' tenacious embolisms.

    Waivering amid the social waters of servile tenaciousness leaves one and many with an abundant measuring of abnormalized emotional isms. The rising above the based rooted common folded philanderers is for commonality's betterment sakes. I am, therefore you are and likewise all ever are even though many meaningfully tender to the analogous fields aplenty. Life does end wherein the living will always begin and willingly linger without the comparative relations set forth for all to waylay their erroneous deniabilities thru confrontationalistic metaphors. I am therewith one is while you are the maybe upon which some do stand.

    Wherefor art thou when the mitigants tenure from one variant to be towards the other variation? Is life really to be found out as being but a dreamt conditioniing therefore raising the unconditioned lackluster of neanderthalled meanials upon subsets' rationalisms? Where are the allotments to be kindled in the aspirations of supping? Can someone be this anyone from which all can raise to oneness their claimings? Where are people when they try to deny the opportunistic relevance in the servitude fields? Is Life the abundant ending giving rises toward the treasured living? Who really knows what?

    May the Lord of Hosts, the Redeemer of the lost find an issue to be reckoned with when the dustiness does settle upon the lands. Raise one's wineglass in retribution for the Heavenly Hosts that beguiles one and all in subversion tactiles of unmentionable clemencies never to be denied as falsehooded factions upon the masses of waivering mobs.

    Abstractions tend to detract from the commoners' euphoricisms of the superlatives bequeathed within the ruthless undulations nomenclatured from popularized deniers of said God idols wherein the tactile natural ism is denutured and placidly placed upon rudimentary placards. We all are God's buildings, the structures of plausible acclimations meant to harbor all God's Sons and Daughters of laments to gain in the accruing.

    1Corinthians 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, [ye are] God's building.

    November 15, 2012 at 5:28 pm |
    • HeavenSense

      I just read all that. Not.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:33 pm |

    word Christianity is an adjective, meaning to do work of honor, or be in following of truth absolute GOD, not as they hind, absurd and divide truth absolute, constant, un dividable by hindu pagan formula of trinity, divide of truth absolute between hindu, criminal King s their hindu criminal prophets, fortune tellers to justify hinduism, racism by birth. please visit limitisthetruth.com to learn more.

    November 15, 2012 at 5:17 pm |




      November 15, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
    • filthy jelly belly ism

      word Jellybean pooping sheep is an adjective, meaning to poop out the Belly with frowny face, or be in following of black jelly bellies rabbit poopies rejected misshapen jelly ism SPRING LOADED LEGS OF FILTHY POOPING PLASTIC SHEEP, not as they stick in filthy molar ism s, absurd and divide black jelly bellies rabbit poopies rejected misshapen jelly ism, bean cocktail, un dividable by stick in filthy molar ism su pagan formula of strawberry cheese cakes, divide of black jelly bellies rabbit poopies rejected misshapen jelly ism between stick in filthy molar ism , margarita King s their stick in filthy molar ism sticky wet beans, filthy sugar free ism bags to justify candy in filthy molar ism yummy, candy ism by parents. please visit jellybelly.com jelly bellies rabbit poopies.com to learn more.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:32 pm |
    • sam

      If you guys scared the hindu-hater troll away, I will love you forever.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:55 pm |

      only for a hindu, ignorant, in hind, darkness of hinduism, ignorance, stay in you hindu darkened cave hindu, ignorant like your kind owl, light truth is a hazard for a hindu, lair like you.

      November 15, 2012 at 8:45 pm |
    • Shells

      You know, sticking a bunch of words together in a row does not a sentence make. Even if you had a valid and important point, no one will ever know what it is, because your posts are incomprehensible. Allow sentences to be your friend.

      Oh, and Christianity isn't an adjective; it's a noun. And it doesn't mean "honor," it means "of, pertaining to, or derived from Jesus Christ or His teachings: a Christian faith."

      I looked it up, just to confirm accuracy before posting (hint: everyone should do this), and I found out that the origin of the words Christian and Christianity are Latin/Greek from the year 1250-1300 AD. Is that how long it took for the religion to be named, or is that when it was formally launched?

      November 18, 2012 at 4:59 pm |
  7. ME II

    The religious numbers are interesting, but if I'm reading the following correctly, the Dems simply got more people out to vote.

    Vote by Party ID
    Democratic:38% 92% 7% 1%
    Republican:32% 6% 93% 1%
    Independent:29% 45% 50% 5%

    Romney actually got more independents that Obama 50% vs. 45%, but otherwise it was a straight party-line vote, 93% and 92%, respectively. It seems to me that it was the Dems' 38% number on the Total that did it.

    November 15, 2012 at 4:58 pm |
    • Observer

      Yes. More people choose to be Democrats than Republicans.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:00 pm |
  8. Observer

    How did prayer do for all the religious Republicans in the election?

    November 15, 2012 at 4:58 pm |
    • ME II

      Would you buy the idea that it prevented an Obama landslide?

      November 15, 2012 at 4:59 pm |
    • Observer

      Sure, Romney was always talking about what great shape our country was in (not!) so you could have expected an Obama landslide, right?

      November 15, 2012 at 5:02 pm |
    • J.W

      God listens to the prayers of Obama supporters too.

      November 15, 2012 at 8:29 pm |
  9. lionlylamb

    Who among you ungodly and godless beings holds onto one's faith of otherly godless and ungodly idolatries, all clamouring aboard the big bang express made quite literally by the Sea of Nothingness?

    Lettuce Love,
    Let Us not,
    Let Us Love,
    Let Us Knot.

    November 15, 2012 at 4:47 pm |
    • Apple Bush

      Imagination. That is the closest one can get to that which cannot be explained.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:54 pm |
    • lionlylamb


      The imaginative has always been upon mankind. Sometimes good and many times bad are the imaginations of our highly spirited Beings.

      Lettuce Love
      Let Us not,
      Let Us Love
      Lettuce knot

      November 15, 2012 at 5:01 pm |
    • Super Friends

      lionly, why don't pull out that 'ol wallet and spring for Microsoft Word? You have some imaginative sentence structure and grammar!

      November 15, 2012 at 5:58 pm |
    • Baba Booey

      Balloon knot!

      November 16, 2012 at 1:41 am |
  10. Apple Bush

    Akira, I did you a solid on your Chrysler Cordoba request 😉

    November 15, 2012 at 4:40 pm |
    • Akira

      Apple Bush, I just saw it! Magnificent! 🙂

      November 15, 2012 at 5:11 pm |
  11. lionlylamb

    Christiandumbs are not the only klutzes to be 'had' by governing slobs, the dumbest of futzes to ever parlor for high governing office spaces. Too God damningly dumb are many of the mobs' classified masses! Far too little intellectual hunchbacks to clamour brazenly upon!

    November 15, 2012 at 4:38 pm |
  12. krussell

    To really get an idea as to how to campaign effectively in 2016, they need to understand how many votes were cast because someone actually supported a candidate and how many votes were cast against a candidate.
    Some people were going to vote Republican based on thier ideals no matter who won the nomination, and some were going to vote against Obama no matter who the other candidate was.

    November 15, 2012 at 4:35 pm |
  13. H. E. Baber

    So Evangelical whites voted for heavily for Romney, and Evangelical minorities, who hold the same religious beliefs, voted for Obama.

    Isn't the obvious conclusion that religion is, at best, epiphenomenal? That it marks some other traits that drive political choices but isn't itself causally efficacious? And isn't it obvious that what is actually doing the work is a combination of class and race?

    The Republican base is the white upper working class–the people with "some college" otherwise known as "lower middle class." These are the people who are most likely to be white Evangelicals. But of course while it's politically incorrect condemn people for being working class, it's meritorious to trash people for their religion. So "Evangelical" has become the preferred code word for Those People–the white working class.

    November 15, 2012 at 4:05 pm |
  14. Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things

    Prayer changes things

    November 15, 2012 at 4:02 pm |
    • niknak

      What if I don't want things changed?

      November 15, 2012 at 4:18 pm |
    • HeavenSense

      Hi Prayerbot.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:33 pm |
    • hal 9001

      I'm sorry, "Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things", but your assertions regarding atheism and prayer are unfounded. Using my Idiomatic Expression Equivalency module (IEE), the expression that best matches the degree to which your assertions may represent truths is: "TOTAL FAIL".

      I see that you repeat these unfounded statements with high frequency. Perhaps the following book can help you:

      I'm Told I Have Dementia: What You Can Do... Who You Can Turn to...

      November 15, 2012 at 4:34 pm |
    • Wakeup

      Atheism IS healthy for all living things! Religion is the main reason for wars and the torture and murder of inocent children! Just look at history!!!!

      November 16, 2012 at 2:41 am |
    • Jeff Williams

      do not feed the troll

      November 16, 2012 at 9:27 am |
  15. SoldierOfConscience

    I cant understand how any christian could have voted for this guy who took away the religious freedoms of churches by forcing them to provide birth control which kills unborn humans at the point of conception.

    November 15, 2012 at 3:47 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      Are you really back again with the same lies that have been refuted over and over? My how desperate you are to convince yourself it's true.

      November 15, 2012 at 3:51 pm |
    • Akira

      What utter nonsense.
      I have seen not one church that was >forced< to do anything, pro-life or pro-choice.
      Time for a different ridiculous rhetoric.
      Religious freedom also means freedom from religion...

      November 15, 2012 at 3:56 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      what lies? If a law were to be passed that forced every place of worship to serve pork, will the mosque be happy? if a law is passed forcing serving of non-kosher food at every place of worship, will the synagogies be happy? If a law is passed forcing all places of worship to serve beef, will Hindu temples be happy?

      its the same concept.

      November 15, 2012 at 3:57 pm |
    • hawaiiguest


      Churches are exempt, end of story. There is your lie.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:00 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      AKira, it is this simple. take Georgetown hospital. It is a catholic church run hospital. by extension, it does not believe in BC. It wont stop you from using it but doesnt want to pay for sin (in its terms, you dont have to agree with it). Basically you are forcing it to do so. They did an end run around the law by saying all insurance will have to comply but the employer wont pay for it. I guess the insurance companies are running a charity.. what about self-insured church hospitals? it falls back on them.

      bottom line : if I dont want to pay for BC coz its against my religious principles, I should be allowed not to do so

      November 15, 2012 at 4:00 pm |
    • hawaiiguest


      And does that hospital receive any government funds to help it run and serve A DIVERSE PUBLIC?

      November 15, 2012 at 4:03 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      taking medicare does not equal government funds. that is money the patient has given to the govenment to pay for his healthcare. What of UnitedHeathCare,my insurer, suddenly turned to the doctor and told him he had to wear purple dresses when serving me else they wont pay him?

      November 15, 2012 at 4:08 pm |
    • hawaiiguest


      Oh so they get absolutely nothing from the property taxes that are specifically used to maintain public services like hosptials, firefighters, and police? They don't get government grants and things of that nature? Not to mention, you're still ignoring the fact that they serve a diverse population, and generally people have to go to hospitals closest to them. Then again, ignoring information is something you do often enough, so I don't know why I should be surprised.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:12 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      Also, what you are saying does not really apply.

      Whether they pay to serve patient X has nothing to do with whether medical procedure X which violates my religious belief should be covered under employer provided health insurance for my employees...

      November 15, 2012 at 4:12 pm |
    • lionlylamb


      Your klutzy futzness tends to be but an exaggeration meant to be the harborage of many hardened folks in all the christiandumb. Mathew 6:33 "But seek ye first the kingdom of God" where in scripture is written at Luke 17:21 "The kingdom of God is inside you".

      How do you SOC make any lamentation or bittersweet understandings regarding such scriptures? Can you not see that it is inside our bodies where Godly kingdoms do exist or are you yet dumbfounded by such verses of literalness?

      November 15, 2012 at 4:17 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      To put it another way, does whether I get a tax break, get medicare, or whatever for the PATIENTS I serve, or anything justify you forcing me to break my religious laws by paying for sinful activities for employees (who are NOT patients.. lets not confuse the issue). I am not even penalizing said employee for sinful activity. just dont want anything to do with it. isnt that a reasonable request?

      November 15, 2012 at 4:19 pm |
    • hawaiiguest


      Gaining governement money means you cannot be discriminatory in hiring employees. Your employees will therefore come from different religions, or no religion at all, and will not share your beliefs. Therefore, yes, it is perfectly reasonable to not take your religious crap into account when it comes to legal prescription medication.
      So no, it is not reasonable to impose your religions idea of sin on all your employees.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:25 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      Also consider the case at goo DOT gl SLASH edatP

      This was a teacher who underwent IVF (which involves destruction of life in the process of trying to create a baby). She was fired, justly.. And she sues. Obama would step in and say re-hire her im sure...

      November 15, 2012 at 4:26 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      Try actually posting a link instead of some random looking letters. Or you could just say whether she was working at a private school or a public school?

      November 15, 2012 at 4:29 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      Hawaii, I strenuously disagree. Let me give you an analogy. Can the government tell welfare recipients : I gave you money, now you got to stand up side down outside government office X one day per week?

      November 15, 2012 at 4:30 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      hawaii, it IS a link. try to follow it. I used a URL shortener coz see enn enn will censor links now and then.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:31 pm |
    • Akira

      Ah, but that is not what you said. A church is not a hospital. Therefore my original statement stands.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:32 pm |
    • hawaiiguest


      Talk about comparing apples and OH LOOK A SQUIRREL!

      November 15, 2012 at 4:32 pm |
    • Sushi Kanji

      We open now. Come on in. Teppan grill or sushi bar.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:35 pm |
    • Barbara

      But lots of Christians did vote for him. Just not the bigoted delusional ones like yourself, MoldOfNonsense.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:39 pm |
    • Akira

      Bottom line: if you don't believe in contraceptives, don't take 'em.
      Nobody is forcing you to.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:40 pm |
    • hawaiiguest


      This was a lawful, if an unethical and stupid, thing. She has no standing. Catholic schools are funded through the RCC and through private donations as far as I'm aware. They are not beholden to many government regulations or discrimination policies, so no this woman has no standing and should not win her lawsuit.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:40 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      “20 percent of all recognized pregnancies end in miscarriage. There is an obvious truth here that cries out for acknowledgment: if God exists, He is the most prolific abortionist of all.” – Sam Harris

      November 15, 2012 at 4:53 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      Done already Soldier? No more false analogies and lies to spew out?

      November 15, 2012 at 4:57 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      akira: a church is not a hospital? I see no difference between the church and a church run hospital.

      hawaii: So you are saying that just coz the govt gives me money for unemployment benefits or welfare or whatever, it can make me do ANYTHING? it has no limits?

      November 15, 2012 at 4:57 pm |
    • sam

      "I see no difference between the church and a church run hospital."

      That's because you have a lot of problems with logic. You're ridiculous.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:02 pm |
    • hawaiiguest


      Are you really that fucking moronic? The government is forcing people to get certain procedures or medications, it's telling companies to cover the cost of the most common (namely BC for women, which can only be gotten through a prescription), unless it is a church or purely funded through the church. This conversation had absolutely nothing to do with unemployment or welfare you stupid lying pile of shit. You're so adamant about thinking that this additional required coverage is anti-religion that you're just pulling irrelevancies, lies, false analogies, and anything else you can think of to hold onto your delusion.
      Wake up you idiot.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:02 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      Should read "The government is not forcing".

      November 15, 2012 at 5:03 pm |
    • Akira

      No, of course you can't see the difference; this is why the debate.
      You will, of course, go to the nearest steeple the next time you break a bone, right?

      November 15, 2012 at 5:03 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      "I see no difference between the church and a church run hospital. "

      The difference is science vs. supersti.tion The church run hospitals aren't relying on prayer to heal their patients or they'd be sued out of existence.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:05 pm |
    • hal 9001

      I'm sorry "hawaiiguest", but "SoldierOfConscience" is, in fact, that fucking moronic.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:07 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      Akira: Of course I see the difference that way, but forcing them to pay for employees {activity that they deem sinful} is like you forcing me to pay for your birth control by holding me up with a shotgun No difference.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:16 pm |
    • sam

      It's like trying to talk to a box of rocks, but worse....

      November 15, 2012 at 5:28 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      I see

      1. ad hominem insults (bag of rocks et al)

      2. say its a false analogy. give no reasons. yaay! I won the argument.


      November 15, 2012 at 5:31 pm |
    • ThatOneGuy

      At the risk of sound disrespectful...really?

      Do you understand how contraception works? Most of it "tricks" the woman's body into thinking she's pregnant (and therefore does not release an egg to be fertalized). What you're (maybe) talking about is the morning after pill.

      Is using a co.nd.om slaughtering thousands of unborn genetic strands? That's a pretty extreme viewpoint.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:34 pm |
    • sam

      I think it was definitely more insulting to the box of rocks.

      The mental gymnastics you must put yourself through on a daily basis just to keep convincing yourself of the kind of nonsense you type has to be exhausting. Reading your posts today has quite possibly made me dumber.

      November 15, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
    • hawaiiguest


      It's not an ad hominem if, as I did, refute your idiocy, since an ad hominem is specifically used to undermine the argument by not addressing anything within it. Your analogy of government paying for your welfare relating to a government funded public institution following federal regulations of medical coverage is absolutely a flase analogy when it comes to religious exceptions. You are also, while under the coverage, not required to use anything you may personally find objectionable, but the fact that you find it objectionable does not give you the right to deny that service to those who don't share your view who are also under that same government funded coverage.
      I find it incredible that you could be this desperate to completely ignore your false analogies.

      November 15, 2012 at 6:27 pm |
    • J.W

      So what would happen if the Christian Scientists bought all of the hospitals then? According to this argument they would not have to provide health care at all, and could deny it to its employees.

      November 15, 2012 at 8:32 pm |
    • hawaiiguest


      If a hospital were completely funded through the church and private donations, then yes they wouldn't need to do that under the current laws.

      November 15, 2012 at 8:34 pm |
    • SoldierOfConscience


      I did not say that you used ad hominem attacks. Lots of verbiage here:

      "You are also, while under the coverage, not required to use anything you may personally find objectionable, but the fact that you find it objectionable does not give you the right to deny that service to those who don't share your view who are also under that same government funded coverage."

      It is not the government that is funding the coverage, it is georgetown hospital. Let me put the analogy in mathematical terms

      Government gives me unemployment : Government forces me to break my religious principles and buy something that is forbidden for me ::
      Government gives Georgetown hospital tax subsidy/whatever : Government forces georgetown hospital o break my religious principles and buy something that is forbidden for them (i.e. BC for employees)

      There, I clarified the analogy

      November 16, 2012 at 5:54 am |
    • SoldierOfConscience

      corection above:

      Government gives Georgetown hospital tax subsidy/whatever : Government forces georgetown hospital to break THEIR religious principles and buy something that is forbidden for them (i.e. BC for employees)

      not "my"

      November 16, 2012 at 8:51 am |
    • tallulah13

      I can't imagine why any American would hold their religion over the rule of law. The law says all for-profit businesses need to adhere to the laws the govern businesses, even businesses owned by religious groups.

      If the catholic church wishes to operate for-profit businesses, then they are required to obey the law. If they don't obey the law, they are subject to the same punishments any other for-profit business would be subject to. If the catholic church does not wish to obey the law, they should dispose of their for-profit businesses.

      Those christians who can't respect the Consti.tution and the secular nature of our government are invited to leave. Perhaps you would enjoy living in a theocracy, like Iran.

      November 16, 2012 at 9:35 am |
    • hawaiiguest


      And exactly how is medical coverage forbidden to you?
      Also, the hospital is not a religious entity! It is an institution that is there for a diverse public! How is this so freaking hard for you to get? Just because a hospital get's some of it's money from a church doesn't make it a purely religious institution, especially when a large chunk of it's money comes from property and other types of taxes! Do you really not understand this at all?

      November 16, 2012 at 1:12 pm |
    • Shells

      I'm a business owner, who provides medical insurance to all my employees, who is extremely religious with strong morals. Chemotherapy is against my religious beliefs, so I have the right to restrict my employees' medical insurance to not cover cancer treatment. Right?

      I'm a business owner, who provides medical insurance to all my employees, who is an atheist with strong morals, meaning, that my moral values include equality for all peoples, tolerance for those who are different than me, not hurting others, and doing all I can to help others, especially those less fortunate than myself, including those who are poor, disabled, sick, homeless, and even ignorant.

      Because that's what we do...

      Religion has nothing to do with morality. (check out the religions of those in prisons and in the midst of scandals)
      People have done evil things for the sake of their religion. People don't do evil things because they don't have a religion.

      November 18, 2012 at 2:00 pm |
  16. Vic

    Sometimes, even the projection of the truth is only "statistical" at best and not necessarily actual! IMHO, I believe a lot of mainline white Christians have been voting the other way since the 1990s because of extreme politics that do not necessarily reflect personal convictions!

    November 15, 2012 at 2:56 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      Voting which "other way"?

      44% of Non-evangelical White Protestants voted for Kerry in 2004 and Obama in both 2008 and 2012. There is *no* change in voting behavior by this group in three election cycles.

      Data is here:

      November 15, 2012 at 3:02 pm |
  17. Apple Bush

    I wonder how many people in the United States suffer from "Hikikomori" and of those, how many mail in their ballots.

    November 15, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
    • Akira

      Now that is one trend from J apan that I hope doesn't catch up here...although I doubt people who suffer from this much care one way or another about voting.

      November 15, 2012 at 4:00 pm |
    • Apple Bush

      Here they are called "Basement Dwellers" and it is not a well understood demo. Spend all day on computer posting on political and relegious blogs.....uh oh. Well I did vote. Sushi?

      November 15, 2012 at 4:37 pm |
  18. Reality

    And now for the real reason BO won the election:

    As noted many times before the election:

    Why the Christian Right no longer matters in presidential elections:

    Once again, all the conservative votes in the country "ain't" going to help a "pro-life" presidential candidate, i.e Mitt Romney, in 2012 as the "Immoral Majority" rules the country and will be doing so for awhile. The "Immoral Majority" you ask?

    The fastest growing USA voting bloc: In 2008, the 70+ million "Roe vs. Wade mothers and fathers" of aborted womb-babies" whose ranks grow by two million per year i.e. 78+ million "IM" voters in 2012.

    2008 Presidential popular vote results:

    69,456,897 for pro-abortion/choice BO, 59,934,814 for "pro-life" JM.

    And the irony:

    And all because many women fail to take the Pill once a day or men fail to use a condom even though in most cases these men have them in their pockets. (maybe they should be called the "Stupid Majority"?)

    The failures of the widely used birth "control" methods i.e. the Pill and male condom have led to the large rate of abortions ( one million/yr) and S-TDs (19 million/yr) in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the Pill or condoms properly and/or use other safer birth control methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and S-TDs.


    November 15, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
    • Corner Cafe

      Reality Bites – Jalapeno Poppers! Jalapeno chilies filled with creamy cheese and deep fried to perfection. $7.99

      November 15, 2012 at 2:38 pm |
  19. Tim

    If that is what we have become as a country...if this is the face of multi-culturalism where everything is looked at and measured in racist terms...then what will bind us as a nation other than distrust and hatred for the other. I remember when Prrwsident Obama won his first term everyone was shouting the death of racism in America. Seems to me it is alive and well and practiced by everyone. I guess the fhe final result is that someday our nation may simply become another middle east. My we have come a long way. I just feel like running down the street and high fiving everyone for a job well done.

    November 15, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
  20. Tom, Tom, the Other One

    Jordy, the unaffiliated, minority Christians intermix ratio is all wrong! We must eject the core or we'll lose the Enterprise!

    November 15, 2012 at 2:27 pm |
    • Belief Blog Bistro

      Try our Tom Tom Tacos! Soft corn tortillas filled with Mahi Mahi, cheese, cabbage, onion and creamy dressing. Add rice and beans and make it a meal. $4.99.

      November 15, 2012 at 2:32 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      'Geordi' but I won't quibble.

      I do wish that Pew would do a better job of defining the break down of the 'nones'.

      It spans everyone from atheists to 'self-instructed' bible literalists who don't attend a church.

      November 15, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      There's some interesting data in the Pew summary:


      Notable is that for 'voters' the religiously unaffilliated is only 12% – not 20%. Because this is defined by exit-poll self-identification rather than church affilliation, the non-denominational Christians in the "nones" are likely reporting here as Protestants.

      The percentage of Protestant voters was 53%. This varies from the 48% listed here:

      Of course this could be the result of higher voter turnout amongst the religious, but Pew have (unintentionally) sliced the data here.

      November 15, 2012 at 2:45 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.