God forbid we use science

[kandrathe]

And you're accusing *me* of being unreasoningly dense?

Yes. You posted some monstrously preposterous high number of people who are "Evangelicals" -- which in the context of that article was referring to the "Religious Right", and not the population of people described by the attendees of all the denominations that are a part of the NAE. I showed you an equally irrelevant number that shows that "when asked how you would describe your religious affiliation" not many people claim to be "Evangelical". You asked me where I got the number, and I showed it to you. So, forget the .5% number. I accept your premise that when asked people would say "Baptist", but might also be in the "Religious Right", however, you refuse to accept that when asked people might say "Catholic" and might also be a part of that voting block called the "Religious Right". Trying to label Evangelicals as the group that is the most right, is like trying to label Germany as the country that is the most European. My point is simply illustrated thus... When you ask me my nationality, I would say "American". Not Minnesotan, and not Swedish, and not North American. The United States belongs to the OAS, which encompasses all of the Americas. Is there anything we in the OAS all agree on? That is how it is within the Baptists, Methodists, and all the miscellaneous sects you have swept up into a nebulous blob of Christians you arbitrarily call Evangelicals. Your motives are to ascribe a political block to a word, and I'm saying that word is not "Evangelical". The survey you claim to be accurate also tells you that, but you refuse to read and understand the numbers.

As I have *already* said, they are not the ONLY ones who support abstinence-only. They are, however, the *largest* block in favour of it, the most *consistent* block in favour of it, and the most *republican* block in favour of it. They are the most likely to vote their religion, on this kind of issue. Therefore, they are, *primarily*, the ones Mitt Romney is looking to win over! If you are unwilling to make even this kind of generalization, how the heck to you ever talk about politics at all? By qualifying every sentence with an entire encyclopaedia?

Where do you get the evidence for this statement? Have we seen any survey that asks a sample of those people who belong to the denominations who are members of the NAE how they stand on abstinence-only sex education for all school grade levels? I don't think so.

That was my only point. You are pointing at the Jerry Falwell type Religious Right, which I am certain it is not 25% of Americans, and certainly not 50% plus. And, as I pointed out in places like California, only 7% of parents believe in AO sex education. I would suspect the figure is not really very high even in the reddest of states.

So here is another source for comparison... Religious Identification in the U.S.: How American adults view themselves

Notice this quote right near the top...

"evangelicals remain just 7% of the adult population. That number has not changed since the Barna Group began measuring the size of the evangelical public in 1994....less than one out of five born again adults (18%) meet the evangelical criteria." (N = 1003; margin of error = ±3.2%).

Or,

Political affiliation:
Adults identifying with a specific faith group are almost evenly split among Republicans, Democrats and Independents. But those who do not identify with a religion are 43% Independent, 39% Democrat, and 17% Republican.

59% of Assemblies of God followers prefer the Republican party; only 13% of religious Jews and 9% of Buddhists agree. 56% of Jews prefer the Democratic party; only 14% of Mormons and 12% of those who identify themselves simply a Evangelical or Born-again agree.

So much for the voting bloc theory. Who cares if you can win 70% of the vote of a group that comprises 7% of the population? A smart politician would aim at Catholics, and mainstream Protestants.