More Popular Issues
See how voters are siding on other popular political issues...
Results from California voters
Last answered 1 hour ago
Distribution of answers submitted by California voters.
Data includes total votes submitted by visitors since Oct 20, 2013. For users that answer more than once (yes we know), only their most recent answer is counted in the total results. Total percentages may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
Choose a demographic filter
- District of Columbia
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- West Virginia
* Data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011)
6 years ago by reuters.com
6 years ago by india.com
6 years ago by huffingtonpost.com
6 years ago by washingtonpost.com
7 years ago by newyorker.com
7 years ago by net.au
Data based on unique submissions (duplicates or multiple submissions are eliminated) per user using a 30-day moving average to reduce daily variance from traffic sources. Totals may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
More stances on this issue
No, because the change is purely cosmetic. The money is better spent doing more practical things. 7 years ago from a Democrat in San Ramon, CA
Take it off currency. Don't add it to anything new. Keep it in existing monuments. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in West Sacramento, CA
Yes, separation of state and church. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Seaside, CA
Yes, along with ending all of these things. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Vista, CA
Yes, Church and state were separated for a reason, and it is of as much benefit for all parties that they stay separate. 7 years ago from a Green in San Diego, CA
The 1st amendment was drafted to prevent the Federal government from picking a side, it doesn't apply to the states. Indeed, the states were openly operating under state religions at the time of its passage. Its authors were fine with this.
Federal land should be impartial, but leave it up to the states. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Coyote, CA
Yes, but the purpose of this reference should be retained in a form that includes all people, regardless of religious affiliation. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Escalon, CA
Yes, but only to the changes made that included references to God in the 1950's and earlier. Original/historical references should be left alone. 7 years ago from a Democrat in La Mesa, CA
Historical sites with religious reference should be allowed, as that reference meant something to the builders. There should be no bias, however, towards the religion or spiritual nature of the reference. 7 years ago from a Democrat in El Dorado Hills, CA
Yes, but it shouldn't remove those references from buildings and national monuments. The references should be removed from new currency being printed, taken out of the Pledge of Allegiance, and not inscribed on new national monuments. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Coronado, CA
I say we should remove the references to God from our currency. There are some atheists in the U.S. that might not like the reference to God on the currency they use. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Lodi, CA