Why are most atheists politically liberal?

[amortalman]

It seems to me that most atheists are politically liberal. But why is that? And should we include agnostics, humanists, and freethinkers? Most creationists tend to be political conservatives. Has it always been this way or is this relatively new? In the U.S., the polarization of the two parties is so severe that the thinking seems to be that if one identifies with either side he is expected to buy into the entire philosophy.

I've asked a lot of questions because as an agnostic I consider myself a conservative on most issues. Am I a man without a country? I would be interested in hearing what you have to say about any or all the questions I presented.

[Bust Nak]

There are political extremists on both sides of the issue. But to imply that conservatives are against a free and fair society and are authoritarian is beyond ridiculous.

Come now, which side wants to ban same sex marriage, abortion and euthanasia?

I would do that because I believe abortion is morally wrong and somewhere you have to make a stand. As far as making life worse for lots of people what could be worse than the wholesale slaughter of millions of unborn babies since Roe vs. Wade?

The wholesale slaughter of even more millions of unborn babies, which is the likely result should abortion be banned accross the board. People are not going to shy away from abortion just because it's illegal.

The comment was in response to your statement that conservative atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers, are in the minority as if that is a bad thing.

I didn't say it as if it's a bad thing though, however it does seems to me you are saying being in the majority is a bad thing. Hence my asking you to affrim that it's not a bad thing.

[amortalman]

There are political extremists on both sides of the issue. But to imply that conservatives are against a free and fair society and are authoritarian is beyond ridiculous.

Come now, which side wants to ban same sex marriage, abortion and euthanasia?

I would say that most evangelical Christian conservatives and many Catholics would probably vote to ban one or more of these three issues. Outside these religious groups, I have no idea how the numbers might fall. But you can't lump all three of these issues into one. Abortion stands alone among the three. For it is a life and death matter and involves a living being who has no power and no voice to fight against it. FYI, there are many liberals who are pro-life.

I would do that because I believe abortion is morally wrong and somewhere you have to make a stand. As far as making life worse for lots of people what could be worse than the wholesale slaughter of millions of unborn babies since Roe vs. Wade?

The wholesale slaughter of even more millions of unborn babies, which is the likely result should abortion be banned accross the board. People are not going to shy away from abortion just because it's illegal.

No, you are wrong on that. If abortion becomes illegal there would be fewer abortions.

An extremely broad body of economic and public health research clearly indicates that various legal protections of unborn children reduce the incidence of abortion. Furthermore, there is also a significant body of academic research which shows that even incremental pro-life laws prevent some abortions from taking place.
https://lozierinstitute.org/how-the-leg ... ion-rates/

[Goat]

It seems to me that most atheists are politically liberal. But why is that? And should we include agnostics, humanists, and freethinkers? Most creationists tend to be political conservatives. Has it always been this way or is this relatively new? In the U.S., the polarization of the two parties is so severe that the thinking seems to be that if one identifies with either side he is expected to buy into the entire philosophy.

I've asked a lot of questions because as an agnostic I consider myself a conservative on most issues. Am I a man without a country? I would be interested in hearing what you have to say about any or all the questions I presented.

I think it's because most conservative atheists are 'in the closet' so to speak. There is more peer pressure in conservative families to conform to religion

[Bust Nak]

I would say that most evangelical Christian conservatives and many Catholics would probably vote to ban one or more of these three issues. Outside these religious groups, I have no idea how the numbers might fall. But you can't lump all three of these issues into one. Abortion stands alone among the three. For it is a life and death matter and involves a living being who has no power and no voice to fight against it. FYI, there are many liberals who are pro-life.

I don't see how that changes anything I said, in general the right is vastly more anti-abortion / euthanasia / sex marriage than the left.

No, you are wrong on that. If abortion becomes illegal there would be fewer abortions.

How much less though, the numbers from that study point towards abortion rate being more tied to cost/ease of access than legal status, it even state that in developed countries the rate doesn't change significantly when the law is changed from medium to low barrier to abortion. But I will grant you that I made an absolute statement, and some decrease in abortion rate is enough to defeat what I said.

[Kenisaw]

[Replying to post 1 by amortalman]

I am a full blown atheist, and a rather ardent one at that. Politically I am conservative though. I think that people like myself are less common than the liberal atheist, but we are out there. I don't think you are a man without a country, but rather you belong to a country that a lot of people don't know where to find on a map.

[amortalman]

[Replying to post 15 by Kenisaw]

Very good point, Kenisaw. But there are evidently a few, perhaps only one, who find it ridiculous that one could be anything but a liberal.

[Clownboat]

There are political extremists on both sides of the issue. But to imply that conservatives are against a free and fair society and are authoritarian is beyond ridiculous.

Come now, which side wants to ban same sex marriage, abortion and euthanasia?

I would say that most evangelical Christian conservatives and many Catholics would probably vote to ban one or more of these three issues. Outside these religious groups, I have no idea how the numbers might fall. But you can't lump all three of these issues into one. Abortion stands alone among the three. For it is a life and death matter and involves a living being who has no power and no voice to fight against it. FYI, there are many liberals who are pro-life.

I would do that because I believe abortion is morally wrong and somewhere you have to make a stand. As far as making life worse for lots of people what could be worse than the wholesale slaughter of millions of unborn babies since Roe vs. Wade?

The wholesale slaughter of even more millions of unborn babies, which is the likely result should abortion be banned accross the board. People are not going to shy away from abortion just because it's illegal.

No, you are wrong on that. If abortion becomes illegal there would be fewer abortions.

An extremely broad body of economic and public health research clearly indicates that various legal protections of unborn children reduce the incidence of abortion. Furthermore, there is also a significant body of academic research which shows that even incremental pro-life laws prevent some abortions from taking place.
https://lozierinstitute.org/how-the-leg ... ion-rates/

Don't forget that only 'unwanted' fetuses get aborted. Them being 'unwanted' cannot be forgotten and is an important qualifier. Even those of us that abhor abortions need to remember this.

With that said...
Would the world be better off if this year we had an extra 1 million unwanted babies born or 1 billion? After answering this question, you are of course still free to find abortions as abhorrent.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 17 by Clownboat]

With that said...
Would the world be better off if this year we had an extra 1 million unwanted babies born or 1 billion? After answering this question, you are of course still free to find abortions as abhorrent.

Everyone here knows I'm an atheist. However, I personally find abortion immoral. I wouldn't stand for it if my girlfriend/wife said she wanted to have one.
On the other hand though, I would vote for it to be legal...perhaps if we're looking at it this way, we could look at other solutions, such as increased education for safe sex or abstinence, or seeking better versions of birth control such as the pill (I hear that the pill can and does have side effects).

[amortalman]

[Replying to post 17 by Clownboat]

Clownboat said:

"Would the world be better off if this year we had an extra 1 million unwanted babies born or 1 billion? After answering this question, you are of course still free to find abortions as abhorrent."

There would certainly be pros and cons to your question. We can speculate on both sides of the issue but no one really knows which would be the right choice in the long run. But if we get into the quagmire of, "would the world be a better place if...?" it's not hard to see where this could lead. For example, would the world be a better place if no one was allowed to live past the age of 70?

[John Human]

[Replying to post 1 by amortalman]

I mean, why wouldn't we be politically liberal?

"Politically liberal," as used here, presumably includes the value of letting others do what they want as long as they don't hurt anybody else. Examples include recreational drug use and pornography, and of course (taking the long view) atheism, which used to be socially condemned.

If I am off base by what is meant on this thread by "politically liberal," please let me know and I will stand corrected.

To me it seems clear that certain "let-them-do-it-if-they-don't-hurt-anybody-else" issues have a hidden social cost. For this reason, promoting the well-being of society goes against the general attitude of letting people do whatever they want as long as they aren't hurting other people.

Of course the problem is determining what is socially harmful. The temperance movement, which led to the "Prohibition" era banning drinking alcohol in the 1930s, comes to mind. Was that a just plain bad idea?

That question reminds me of how John Adams began his political career. He ran for local office in his hometown on the position of shutting down the local "watering hole." Adams discovered, as he related, that this just served to make him unpopular.