Talk:110th United States Congress

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search


How come polls are allowed when they speak poorly of the Democratic congress, but are forbidden when they speak poorly of president Bush or show a growing acceptance of gay rights? Maestro 14:17, 18 June 2007 (EDT)

Interesting question; let's examine this bit of reporting for example:
A leading conservative theologian outside the ex-gay movement recently echoed the view that homosexuality may not be a choice, but a matter of DNA. To the shock and anger of many of his constituents, the Rev. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, wrote that "we should not be surprised" to find a genetic basis for sexual orientation.
That's heretical to many conservative Christians. But it's a view increasingly embraced by the public at large; a Gallup Poll last month found that 42% of adults believe sexual orientation is present at birth. (Three decades ago, when Gallup first asked the question, just 13% held that view.) [1]
So, a question of science is supported by a Gallup Poll.
The 10 year low in Congressional approcal is of historic proportions. As to Bush, where do you claim it is not cited?
As to gay rights, the problem we've generally encountered is just like cited above, using polls to support "science". RobS 15:16, 18 June 2007 (EDT)

Thank you for your quick and intelligent response. My point is that I once included poll results in the gay rights article, stating that over fifty percent of Americans felt that homosexuals should be allowed to have civil unions. I deleted a poll that was over three years old that stated (in the article, not the poll results) that a majority of Americans thought homosexuality was 'pervereted and disgusting.' You yourself reverted my edits, with the comment we don't give a rip about polls. On the main page, you once included a poll that stated the majority of Americans felt evolution was a faulty theory. It would seem that we include polls about public opinion and beliefs only under certain circumstances. As for Bush's approval rating, where could we put it? His article is permanently locked. Respectfully Maestro 15:35, 18 June 2007 (EDT)

Thank you for your intelligent and civil way of presenting the issues. There are differenct types of Polls, and they can serve one of two functions. Firstly, some polls are taken over many years, even decades. For example, people who self-identify as "conservative" have consistently outnumbered those who self-identify as "liberal" by a nearly 2-1 ratio in the United States since about the 1960s. Now on the other hand, there are routine "opinion polls" taken virtually every moment--in this upcoming Presidential race we are seeing opinion polls being reported on a daily basis (if not minute by minute). So, in prefacing an article with "The majority of Americans believe X", which do we use, the long term trends, or the momentary blips?
Another factor to consider: most of these polls are put out, or sponsored by, for-profit news organizations -- for-profit organizations which routinely target demographic groups for sales of thier product -- news organizations with headlines to write and deadlines to meet. To what extent are these "momentary snapshots" manufactured news? All of this deserves legitimate discsussion.
I don't think it was me in the evolution thingee and the front page.
Perhaps continuing this discussion on a Talk:Opinion poll page would be beneficial. RobS 16:30, 18 June 2007 (EDT)