Postmaterialism and referenda voting to legalize marijuana

American Muslims' Attitudes Toward Homosexuality: Exploring the Effects of Gender, Religiosity, and Income Inequality

Literature on Muslims and Islam has not empirically assessed the impact of American Muslims' gender, religiosity, income inequality, and the interaction between the latter two factors, on their attitudes toward homosexuality. Using logistic regression models fitted to data from the 2017 Pew Survey of US Muslims (n = 712), this article assesses these factors' effects on their view that society should either accept or discourage homosexuality. Findings reveal that men, compared with women, and more religious individuals tend to express homonegativity; while those from higher-income households are likely to agree that society should accept same-sex relationships. Also, the religiosity-prejudice association is moderated by income inequality. These findings have important religious and social implications. Firstly, the prevailing approach of essentializing Islamic perspectives on homosexuality as being favorable or prejudicial overlooks that they are socially contingent. Secondly, policies contributing to Muslim minorities' economic well-being can encourage them to embrace liberal religious and social values.

Legalization of marijuana or not? Opinions from over 38,000 residents in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Marijuana is legal in many Western countries and Thailand. In Taiwan, Marijuana remains a category-2 narcotic; however, some legislative candidates recently advocated legalization of medical marijuana. This study surveyed a large sample of Taiwanese to gain a better understanding of the public's knowledge and attitudes towards legalizing marijuana.

METHODS

This cross-sectional mixed-methods study included demographic data and responses to a survey questionnaire, "Knowledge and Attitudes of Legalizing Marijuana" (KALM). The survey included 15 statements about four categories: public health, social impact, medical applications of THC (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol), and legal and tax consequences; and two yes/no questions about medical use and legalization of marijuana. Knowledge was scored as disagree = 0, no knowledge = 2, or agree = 4; attitude was scored from 0 = very unimportant to 4 = very important. Responses to an open-ended question asking for additional comments/concerns were analysed with content analysis. The survey was conducted from February 15 to March 1, 2023.

RESULTS

Data were analysed from 38,502 respondents, aged 15 to > 56 years. Most were female (67.1%) and parents (76.4%). Scores were higher for respondents who were parents, religious, ≥ 36 years of age, had a high-income status, no history of substance abuse, knowledge of medical marijuana, and did not support legalization of marijuana. Medical personnel had greater knowledge of marijuana, but their attitude indicated they viewed legalization as less important. In the open-ended question, many respondents requested more information about marijuana be provided to the public before considering legalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Taiwanese respondents considered legalization of marijuana a significant concern, especially as it relates to impacts on public health.

Drug Legalization, Elite Support, and Government Effectiveness in Latin America

In Latin America, the legalization of drugs—where it occurred—has been driven mainly by elites, although much attention has been placed on public opinion. Considering that efforts toward legalization have been top-down, analysis should concentrate on opinions of the governing elites. To undertake such an analysis, we draw on data from surveys conducted in 18 Latin American parliaments (2012–2018), and we examine elite perspectives on the legalization of all drugs. Results from a Bayesian hierarchical logistic analysis show that in countries where the government is less effective, and where public health problems persist, legislators are less likely to support legalization. We argue that this is due to a lack of trust by MPs in legalization as a solution to trafficking. Wherever those concerned with drug trafficking see the current government as problematic, they will be less likely to support so challenging and complex a policy as drug legalization.

The effect of public opinion and politics on attitudes towards pill testing: Results from the 2019 Australian Election Study

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Following several deaths due to drug overdoses at music festivals in Australia, pill testing (or drug checking) has been proposed as a means of reducing the risk to young people. However, pill testing is a politically controversial policy in Australia. This paper examines the political dimension to the debate, its relationship with other social issues and how it divides party supporters.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The data come from the 2019 Australian Election Study survey-a large (n = 2179), nationally weighted representative probability survey conducted immediately after the federal election. Bivariate and multivariate analyses are used to identify the social groups, attitudes and vote preferences most associated with public views about pill testing.

RESULTS

Almost two-thirds of the public support pill testing at music festivals. The young and those who do not attend church are most likely to express support. Supporters of other liberal social opinions, such as the legalisation of marijuana, are also strongly supportive of pill testing. Those who vote for one of the two main conservative parties are less likely to support pill testing.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

While a majority of the public support pill testing, beyond the Australian Capital Territory this has not translated into policy in other jurisdictions. The results show that there is a high level of political polarisation surrounding opinions among both voters and political elites. This issue must be addressed if the policy is to be advanced as part of an overall harm reduction approach to drug use.