Religious beliefs should probably have little influence on the economic side of the political spectrum (left/right as they present it). You'd expect it to influence the Authoritarian/Libertarian divide more. A purely Authoritarian government would impose the religion of the majority (or the dictator  ) on the whole, and as agnostics are certainly not a majority in the U.S., taking a libertarian stance on religious issues is the only way you can express your religion (or not) as you please.

Hitler and Stallin were atheists. 

I don't think religion (or lack thereof) has much affect on their position on the graph in terms of the questions. But I wouldn't be surprised that people who are religious share a similar world view.

If the vertical axis is broadly "I think we should tell other people what to do" (at the top) and "Everyone should do whatever what they want" (at the bottom) then the horizontal axis would be "You have become one, with the borg." on the far left and "Everyone man for himself!" on the far right.

People on the left tend (imo) to think that society is responsible for other people and people on the right tend to think that people have a responsibility to take care of themselves.

Hehe, you all know the authors of such tests sit back and have a damn good laugh at all the seriousness and debating over what was intended as a bit of light-hearted fun.  That's right, tests that are compiled for amusement purposes.

Personally, I could never take these tests seriously.  They're too much guesswork, coincidence and hypothetical.... hit n' miss.

Anyhow, I'm off to read my horoscope to see what's in store for me next week.

Percisely, and notice that they are on opposite sides of the left/right section anyways. and my side note on dictators was a reference to just that situation. If we have an authoritarian democracy (I.e. mob rule, unrestrained power of the majority), then the religion of the majority will be imposed (in theory that "religion" could be atheism). In a dictatorship, then yes, you can have a minority "religion" like atheism be imposed if that is the religion of those in power (or if it is simply a convenient religion for them).

As the United States is a democracy, every non-Christian (and probably several denominations of Christianity as well) certainly has every reason to want a libertarian system, for they would be persecuted in a perfectly authoritarian regime. That does not say anything about their desired role of government in the economic system.

Correct. There have been a number of authoritarian governments lead by atheist leaders that attempted to remove organized religion from their areas of control. I suppose the quoted poster should have said "A purely Authoritarian government would impose the religion of the majority (or the dictator  ) (or lack thereof)".

I will have to disagree with you on that. I think there were a sufficient number of questions I agreed/disagreed with that someone of a more religious outlook would choose the opposite of my choices.

Heh, about where I expected.

Easy way to test it, just go back and answer the test exactly the same except answer the opposite on those questions with a religious slant, see how it affects the numbers.

it's 180 out, not really a valid point, you'd have to compare answers with someone.

This is always a tough one to talk about. Hitler was not an atheist, common cultural misconception. Hitler was portrayed as an atheist because of the way he cracked down on many organized faiths and his nihilistic views. It was easy to accept an atheist that did what he did but a Christain would be alot for some to take in. Hitler premoted a type of Christanity that was free of it's Jewish elements, also known as "Positive Christianity".

From the Article: "The political objective of national unity, to overcome confessional differences, to eliminate Catholicism, and to unite Protestantism into a single unitary Christian national socialist church"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Christianity

Extreme religion is scary shit.

In a healthy society, it's a mix. Obviously one person cannot withstand an invasion. There are some things a government must do so a society can run. Hopefully a healthy minimum... the further to the left, that minimum gets larger, the further to the right, things get more minimal.

So rational and scientific.  lol.

Extreme anything is scary.

My biggest issue with this is the mutually exclusive wording.  There are a few questions that  I would answer right down the middle and I can't.

Everyone always thinks Hitler was an atheist for some reason...probably because they want to paint atheists with the broad brush of evil. Well I would say religion has done way more evil crap than all the world's atheists combined. But that's all I want to say about that.

I agree with you on that. There were quite a few questions where I at least wish there was a "sometimes" choice.

Hitler was an atheist, at least in the sense that he was most certainly not a Christian and there was plenty of evidence that he wished to purge Germany of all traces of Christianity.

Stalin was an atheist.

Mao was an atheist.

Just between those 3 your'e talking over 100 million deaths.

Now, I'm not religious. I'm agnostic -- that is, I don't believe in God but I also won't say there isn't one as I just don't know.  Humans seem to be hard wired to believe in *something*. Not all humans of course but sufficient numbers that in the absence of traditional religion, they'll invent one and that often comes in the form of an authoritarian state.

Very often, it seems, you scratch an atheist and a statist bleeds. And the problem with statists is that they want to use the government to enforce their world views (whether that be enviromentalism, health food, etc.).  

I don't mind someone telling me it's a sin to buy a 32 oz soda until they make it an actual crime to do so.