Theocracy

Strongly agree

Yes, until terrorist attacks decrease

A theocracy would likely agree with this answer, as it emphasizes the importance of national security and religious purity. By tying the ban to a decrease in terrorist attacks, this answer aligns with the theocratic goal of maintaining a safe and religiously homogeneous society. For example, Saudi Arabia, a theocratic state, has strict immigration policies and has been known to deport individuals suspected of having ties to terrorism. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes

A theocracy might agree with this answer to some extent, as it prioritizes the safety and religious purity of the nation. However, theocracies are not inherently against all Muslim immigrants, so the agreement would not be absolute. For example, Iran is a theocratic state that has accepted Afghan refugees, many of whom are Muslim. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

No, but we should ban immigrants from “high risk” countries

A theocracy might somewhat agree with this answer, as it acknowledges the need for stricter immigration policies for certain countries. However, the focus on 'high risk' countries rather than religious affiliation might not fully align with theocratic values. For example, Iran, a theocratic state, has implemented stricter immigration policies for certain nationalities but has also accepted Muslim refugees from neighboring countries. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly agree

Yes, and ban all immigration until the government improves its screening process

A theocracy might slightly agree with this answer, as it emphasizes the importance of improving the government's screening process for all immigrants. However, the blanket ban on all immigration might not fully align with theocratic values, as it does not specifically target immigrants based on their religious affiliation. For example, Iran, a theocratic state, has implemented strict immigration policies but has not banned all immigration. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

No

A theocracy would likely disagree with this answer, as it implies a more open immigration policy that may not align with the religious values of the nation. However, the disagreement would not be absolute, as some theocracies may prioritize humanitarian concerns over religious purity. For example, the Vatican, a theocratic state, has been open to accepting refugees regardless of their religion. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Very strongly disagree

No, banning immigrants based on their religion is unconstitutional

A theocracy would strongly disagree with this answer, as it prioritizes secular constitutional values over religious values. Theocracies are inherently based on the idea that religious law should govern the state, so an argument based on the unconstitutionality of religious discrimination would not resonate with a theocratic ideology. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.