Half of UK Muslims want homosexuality banned

originally posted by: LostThePlot
Funny that, because I want all Muslims banned.

Banned from what? Britian, football matches, entry to the Tate museum? participating in surveys???

I can never understand the religious argument that on the one hand - God made everything on this earth and on the other hand - we don't accept homosexuality which patently is a means of controlling population (or it was supposed to be), which still comes under the auspices of God's creation.

As for muslims not liking homosexuality best not to ask how many of them practise this because they can't get a woman?

The media is owned by murdoch who is jewish so you will get his take on the world forced down our throats if you only watch his media outlets because he always has a political agenda.

If you polled Muslims it would be a similar result to those who want Sharia but its their way of living and as the generations go through the urge for this religious control over the lives usually gets considerably less when they have the option.

a reply to: LostThePlot

From where exactly do you "want all Muslims banned"?

The United Kingdom?

Europe?

Planet Earth?

Everyone is entitled to freedom of religious expression as long as they follow the law of the land! At least last time i looked that's how it is in the U.K.

a reply to: UKTruth

The really important data - not represented in this survey - is whether there is a difference in the percentages between those Muslims that are second generation vs later arrivals in the UK. If there was a difference it would point to effective integration.

Fair points. The integration aspect is key to the popular unrest and fuelled by shock headlines in the media. Not only would it be interesting to see generational changes in values, it'd be worthwhile trying to encourage them.


a reply to: nonspecific

This is why I take the stance I do

I'm unsettled by rising immigration and how integration is going to work. The difference is, I don't allow it to turn to hate or calls for kicking people out. There are modern ways that offer more success than cries for witch-burnings.

originally posted by: auraofblack
a reply to: UKTruth

500 Muslims saying ban homosexuality against a population of over 2million muslims isn't a large enough sample group to fairly represent the group as a whole. Factoring in questions being loaded and it's more akin to hairproducts adverts that stated 90 percent of women agree that brand X does make their hair feel better(out of 194 surveyed)

No, the sample size was perfectly fine. To say otherwise is like arguing that the world is not spherical. There are many great minds through history that have done all the hard work for you here. Unless we just ignore hundreds of years of mathematical progression and start learning from scratch again, I can confirm to you that the sample size was fine.

However, loaded questions or poor stratification in the sample can skew the result, which is why i asked if you had any details on the sampling method and the question set.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Misterlondon
To be honest it's a question that doesn't really need to be asked.. It's sole purpose is to stir up more hate and division amongst the masses.

I think the questions really do need to be asked. My view is that migrants should be integrating into UK society, not creating countries withing countries.

And that is exactly the point of the article. Peoples opinions and feelings on these matters are manipulated. The fact that these questions don't ask about that but insinuate that is the problem. People feel this because of the hatred that has been drummed up by the media.

The last decade only proves that these tactics are very real. Benefits culture, where anyone who is on benefits is now considered to be a waste of space that is cheating the system. Hoodies, several generations of our children vilified and spattered all over the news, now everyone who wears a hood must be upto no good.... The list goes on.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: auraofblack
a reply to: UKTruth

500 Muslims saying ban homosexuality against a population of over 2million muslims isn't a large enough sample group to fairly represent the group as a whole. Factoring in questions being loaded and it's more akin to hairproducts adverts that stated 90 percent of women agree that brand X does make their hair feel better(out of 194 surveyed)

No, the sample size was perfectly fine. To say otherwise is like arguing that the world is not spherical. There are many great minds through history that have done all the hard work for you here. Unless we just ignore hundreds of years of mathematical progression and start learning from scratch again, I can confirm to you that the sample size was fine.

However, loaded questions or poor stratification in the sample can skew the result, which is why i asked if you had any details on the sampling method and the question set.

Sample sizes aside it is all down to the demographics of the area in which the poll is taken.

If you went to a football match and asked 1000 people if they liked football would that figure represent the nation as a whole?

Polls are created to give the answer the person paying for the poll wants not to find an acurate result.

Here's the full survey (pdf).

600+ pages. I'll skim and post thoughts shortly.

With it being ICM and contracted by Channel 4, I expect it to be scrupulous : up:

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: auraofblack
a reply to: UKTruth

500 Muslims saying ban homosexuality against a population of over 2million muslims isn't a large enough sample group to fairly represent the group as a whole. Factoring in questions being loaded and it's more akin to hairproducts adverts that stated 90 percent of women agree that brand X does make their hair feel better(out of 194 surveyed)

No, the sample size was perfectly fine. To say otherwise is like arguing that the world is not spherical. There are many great minds through history that have done all the hard work for you here. Unless we just ignore hundreds of years of mathematical progression and start learning from scratch again, I can confirm to you that the sample size was fine.

However, loaded questions or poor stratification in the sample can skew the result, which is why i asked if you had any details on the sampling method and the question set.

Sample sizes aside it is all down to the demographics of the area in which the poll is taken.

If you went to a football match and asked 1000 people if they liked football would that figure represent the nation as a whole?

Polls are created to give the answer the person paying for the poll wants not to find an acurate result.

Correct... the potential skew here is who was asked, not how many were asked.

a reply to: UKTruth

Im not saying the science is wrong and I am sure the earth is spherical but the science is being incorrectly used, therefore it is wrong.

I could start a poll on ATS, if I loaded it with questions that are designed to do nothing but carry out an agenda then it isn't worth anything. For instance, 9/11.

Multiple choice.

The Government did it ?
The Jews did it?
The Muslims did it?
We did it?

People will answer within the choices given, I'm sure that is a fair poll, isn't it? If I give a person these options but the real answer was perhaps something different or not fully understood then you can see how these things are used to manipulate opinion.

Anyway, public opinion is another horsecrap thing they roll out whenever they need to us to get on board with something. Look around, since when did public opinion count for anything other than to beat the war drums?

originally posted by: Kandinsky
Here's the full survey (pdf).

600+ pages. I'll skim and post thoughts shortly.

With it being ICM and contracted by Channel 4, I expect it to be scrupulous : up:

Good find - skimming also... will read in detail later... some worrying numbers for 1st and 2nd generation Muslims in there at first sight.

a reply to: UKTruth

Good spread I thought. Still skimming through.

Page 15 shows where the sample was taken from:



The ages and social brackets are quite spread out too with homeowners alongside renters. In answer to aurablack's earlier question, it looks like integration is higher amongst the younger generations although that was a first impression and might change.

Will check the homophobia age-related samples in a moment.

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: auraofblack

So half of UK Muslims do not want homosexuality banned.

Half the people asked could have been gay Muslims. Just saying.

a reply to: misscurious

Funny you should say that....

www.equalityhumanrights.com...

LGBT population density in the UK is thought to bebetween 0.3% to possibly upto 10%. I am unsure if this survey takes into account different religions but if we were going to interpret anything from that it would include Muslims too. If it is accepted with in your social group as being taboo, then those who identify as homosexual within this group would skew the results..

How many say these things because they are scared or because they are compelled to?

So who are they to talk? Muslims are just as likely to be homosexuals as any other group. Maybe there'd be less violence against women over there if they didn't scare gay men into a lifestyle they hate by having to prove their straight by getting married only to resent it and end up using the wife for a punching bag or killing her for some "Dishonor" reason.

a reply to: UKTruth

I think the only way to be 95% sure of getting an accurate read on something, is to ask everyone who has an opinion relevant to the position being examined. You could survey one thousand people from one region in the country, and get a totally different response than you would get in the rest of the nation, about almost any one thing that a person can have an opinion on. Weather, sports, political matters of all kinds, religion, finance....

Sample size is less important than how well spread out your sample is. If they only polled in Bradford, for example. that would mean the sample was about as indicative of a majority opinion as polling that one guy in the pub on match day who hates football, preferring cricket to the exclusion of all other ball sports ever invented. I know that, because I am that one guy, but my opinion means sweet diddly, because millions of people really love football.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I agree. Statistics are a clever way of pretending you have taken everyone's say
into account whilst actually doing the opposite.

a reply to: auraofblack

With regard to the media manipulation that you mentioned, I have a feeling that someone has missed a vital point here.

The comments section was closed?

It doesn't matter that the information is right or wrong.
It doesn't matter what your opinion of the information is.

What matters is that they gave you their message to spread and you have done so without them lifting a finger.
They close their comments section so you'll comment elsewhere.
We all know how the media works but have a tendency to be as predictable as they know we are.
Not a criticism of you OP but we've generated three pages of padding for their silly ideas here.
Take note of other stories with no comments allowed.
Cheers.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: UKTruth

I think the only way to be 95% sure of getting an accurate read on something, is to ask everyone who has an opinion relevant to the position being examined. You could survey one thousand people from one region in the country, and get a totally different response than you would get in the rest of the nation, about almost any one thing that a person can have an opinion on. Weather, sports, political matters of all kinds, religion, finance....

Sample size is less important than how well spread out your sample is. If they only polled in Bradford, for example. that would mean the sample was about as indicative of a majority opinion as polling that one guy in the pub on match day who hates football, preferring cricket to the exclusion of all other ball sports ever invented. I know that, because I am that one guy, but my opinion means sweet diddly, because millions of people really love football.

Another important factor is weather or not the person interviewed is comfortable answering the question honestly.

So if a 20 year old Muslim is asked his opinion on homosexuality outside a mosque with his parents and grandparents in earshot he is more likely to give a safe answer through fear.

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: UKTruth

I think the only way to be 95% sure of getting an accurate read on something, is to ask everyone who has an opinion relevant to the position being examined. You could survey one thousand people from one region in the country, and get a totally different response than you would get in the rest of the nation, about almost any one thing that a person can have an opinion on. Weather, sports, political matters of all kinds, religion, finance....

Sample size is less important than how well spread out your sample is. If they only polled in Bradford, for example. that would mean the sample was about as indicative of a majority opinion as polling that one guy in the pub on match day who hates football, preferring cricket to the exclusion of all other ball sports ever invented. I know that, because I am that one guy, but my opinion means sweet diddly, because millions of people really love football.

Another important factor is weather or not the person interviewed is comfortable answering the question honestly.

So if a 20 year old Muslim is asked his opinion on homosexuality outside a mosque with his parents and grandparents in earshot he is more likely to give a safe answer through fear.

You've got to give these guys credit for knowing their business. Stats, surveys and analyses are taught in the first year of university. I had to do it all in the first year of BSc psychology* and, no, didn't enjoy the maths whatsoever although designing surveys was fun. Leading surveys are no longer 'accidental' as the body of research is now decades old.

* no false valour here. I switched to another degree after the first year