Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Saturday, August 23, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version Print | Comments |

Document Study: Conservatives Grow Wary Of Mixing Religion, Politics

by Huffington Post

Thanks to SPS for the link.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/21/study-conservatives-grow_n_120520.html

Study: Conservatives Grow Wary Of Mixing Religion, Politics

ERIC GORSKI
Social conservatives are growing more wary of church involvement in politics, joining moderates and liberals in their unease about blurring the lines between pulpit and ballot box, a new study found.

Fifty percent of conservatives think churches and other places of worship should stay out of social and political matters, up from 30 percent four years ago, according to a survey released Thursday by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.

That significant shift in conservative thought has brought the country to a tipping point on the question: a slim majority of Americans _ 52 percent _ now think churches should keep out of politics.

That's an eight percentage point increase over 2004 and the first time a majority of Americans has held that opinion since Pew officials started asking the question 12 years ago.

On this question, the gap between conservatives and liberals is narrowing: just four years ago, liberals were twice as likely as conservatives to say churches should stay out of politics. Now, 50 percent of conservatives and 57 percent of liberals think that. Four years ago, 62 percent of liberals opposed church involvement in politics. Democrats and Republicans are about even on the question, as well.

The survey also found largely unchanged attitudes along religious lines on the presidential choices compared with 2004, despite Democrat Barack Obama's strong play for religious voters and Republican John McCain's hesitancy to talk about his own faith and problems connecting with his party's evangelical base.

McCain leads Obama 68 percent to 24 percent among white evangelical Protestants, comparable to what President Bush was polling four years ago. But the support is tepid: just 28 percent of white evangelicals call themselves "strong" supporters of McCain, well short of Bush's 57 percent in 2004.

Changing attitudes about mixing church and politics could emerge as a factor in the fall campaign _ particularly for McCain. Both campaigns are plotting get-out-the-vote efforts in faith communities, but past Republican successes came when attitudes were more welcoming.

The attitude shift cut across conservative constituencies: 46 percent of Republican Protestants want churches out of politics, up from 28 percent in 2004. Thirty-six percent of white evangelical Republicans hold that view, up from 20 percent four years ago.

The question asked specifically about places of worship, which by law cannot take stands for or against candidates or political parties but may speak out on issues. So the public might hold different views about political stances taken by religious leaders speaking as individuals or religious advocacy groups.

The findings come after midterm elections in 2006 that saw Democrats seize control of Congress, a landmark court ruling this year legalizing gay marriage in California, and also amid an identity crisis among conservative evangelicals about which issues should take priority and who speaks for the movement.

Among the groups that shifted strongly away from wanting to see churches involved in politics: Americans who are less educated, those who believe gay marriage is a very important issue and those who think the two major parties are unfriendly to religion.

"To my mind, that spells frustration," said Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center. "But by the same token, we know these very same people are not interested in less religiosity in the political discourse. They almost universally want a religious person as president.

"It's not that they want to take religion out of politics, it's that their frustrations with the way things seem to be going are leading them to say, 'Well, maybe churches should back off on this.'"

The survey confirmed that white non-Hispanic Catholics, who make up about 18 percent of the electorate, are shaping up to be a big swing vote this fall: 45 percent support McCain, while 44 percent back Obama. Democrat John Kerry, a Catholic, was doing better at this juncture in 2004, winning 50 percent of those Catholics.

Asked which candidate "shares my values," 47 percent of all respondents replied Obama and 39 percent said McCain. White evangelicals favor McCain on that question, the religiously nonaffiliated leaned Obama, while white non-Hispanic Catholics and mainline Protestants were split.

Democrats have made inroads in closing the so-called God gap, at least by one measure: 38 percent of respondents said the party is "friendly toward religion," up from 26 percent two years ago. Even so, considerably more people _ 52 percent _ viewed the Republican Party as religion-friendly.

Comments 1 - 14 of 14 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #235662 by mordacious1 on August 23, 2008 at 11:20 am

 avatarThe "god gap". Is that the gap between a person's ears?

Other Comments by mordacious1

2. Comment #235681 by King of NH on August 23, 2008 at 11:37 am

 avatarBut what party is atheist friendly? What party supports those of us that choose to give up childhood fantasies and actually propell the nation forward with moon landings, nuclear energy, improved crop yeilds, computers, genetic medicine, virus defense, and global aid (looking at you, Gates [thumbs up])?

But polls are unreliable. If you asked me at five in the morning who I supported for president: McCain, Obama, Nader, or a Dunkin' Donuts Cinnamon Coffee with light sugar and cream... This would be an odd election year.

Other Comments by King of NH

3. Comment #235684 by Roger Stanyard on August 23, 2008 at 11:47 am

 avatarDunno about the others in here but it seems to be that the fundamentalist religious right ain the USA re in for a big shock this year. Sonce the 1980s their star has been on the rise but the in the current Presidential hustings they haven't known who to back..

Much of the mainstream Republican Party thinks the fundamentalists are just plain bonkers. The fundamentalists have been used by Bush who has provided them with very little in return. It is a trick that can't be repeated.

It also seems to me that public opinion in general in the USA is increasingly turning against the excesses of the fundamentalists - indeed, I suspect the fundamentalists have seriouslu damaged the reputation and standing of religion in the USA

Certainly the creationists have looked increasingly desperate since they spectacularly lost the Dover trial in 2005. The recruitment of wingnuts to the ID cause and the openly biased Expelled film are clear evidence of the desperation. Ted Haggard little problem with his willie and recreational drugs proved not exactly to be the fundamentalists' best advocacy either,

One thing that puzzles me, though, is whether The God Delusion was a significant factor in the now waning phase of US fundamentalism. I've got mixed messages from my American pals on this.

Does anyone have any views on it.

don;t know who to back.

Other Comments by Roger Stanyard

4. Comment #235703 by NewEnglandBob on August 23, 2008 at 12:16 pm

 avatar3. Comment #235684 by Roger Stanyard:

My wish is that everything you said in that post is true. If I were religious, I would say "From Roger's mouth (fingers typing?) to God's ear".

Unfortunately, I feel that things are trending a bit toward your statements, but not fast or deep enough to make a difference yet.

The fundies and the christian 'wrong' are still vocal and wield an inordinate amount of influence.

Other Comments by NewEnglandBob

5. Comment #235720 by umkomasia on August 23, 2008 at 12:37 pm

Of course I agree in general that religion and politics don't mix. However, I do think that at times it may be a luxury of the middle and upper classes of society. What would the civil rights movement that gave american blacks and their main leader Martin Luther King have been like if they did not have their churches as organizing centers? I never thought I would give religion and politics mixing any consideration at all, but after living in the deep south now for 10 years, I can see that there may be times when it works. In this context, don't forget about the Danbury Baptists letter to Thomas Jefferson - the very letter that gave us the phrase "wall of separation." Was this not a case of a religious group directly asking a politician for help? As I said, most of the time this is bad, but when a group is being attacked by a majority, religion can give them the tools to fight back in way that would not otherwise be possible

Other Comments by umkomasia

6. Comment #235783 by SilentMike on August 23, 2008 at 2:40 pm

Well, the headline seems encouraging enough. the content, however, is quite a depressing read. I think I`ll hang on to that headline and say that at least there's some good news.

Other Comments by SilentMike

7. Comment #235831 by TIKI AL on August 23, 2008 at 5:13 pm

Until brainwashing a child with "fear of the lord" joins being locked in a cage, starved, beaten, or having boiling water poured on them as criminal child abuse, not much will change.

Other Comments by TIKI AL

8. Comment #235914 by MRA on August 23, 2008 at 11:13 pm

 avatarI hope that things are changing, but the amount of people who consider god relevant to their politics is still way too high! Atheists in the US need to lobby politicians as religious groups do, then the politicians will start to listen.

Other Comments by MRA

9. Comment #236045 by F_A_F on August 24, 2008 at 4:52 am

This is good stuff. We can never realistically hope that all religious folks suddenly switch to being irreligious, but small victories such as an increasing gap between private religious beliefs and public political standards will increase. I don't doubt that a large part of this could be attributed to the failures in Iraq. GWB and TB both attributed parts of their motivations for going to war in Iraq as religious.....but if results on the ground are anything to go by, it could suggest that their god has deserted them! Maybe we are finally starting to see that social and political decision making is best left to matters of evidence and not of faith...

Other Comments by F_A_F

10. Comment #236099 by InfuriatedSciTeacher on August 24, 2008 at 8:23 am

3. Comment #235684 by Roger Stanyard on August 23, 2008 at 11:47 am
They haven't, and he is one, in response to fundamentalists, Bush, and the reputation of religion in America. The majority of religious people I meet are very adept at applying the "that isn't my religion" argument to all the wingnuts your hear about, and the few I've met who've read TGD have felt insulted by it (probably because those were the ones most capable of realising their own cognitive dissonances and felt a bit stupid after reading it). There are large swaths or rural America that are highly religious, in many cases fundamentalist themselves, and in either case whole-heartedly support creation as science, bans on gay marriage, and the host of other agenda points espoused by the fundies. Remember, the politicians in places like Louisiana and Kansas who passed these laws (I'm referring to ID in the classroom specifically with that one) are members of the population in general, albeit with a good deal more money. I would argue however that being destitute and uneducated is a condition that fosters religious belief, so their constituents are more likely to hold those beliefs than the politicians themselves. Bobby Jindal holds a Bio degree from Brown: do you think it more likely that he really believes that creationism should be given equal billing with evolution in the classroom, or that he likes being governor and having a shot at VP so he chooses to pander to fundamentalists?

Other Comments by InfuriatedSciTeacher

11. Comment #236120 by Logicel on August 24, 2008 at 9:15 am

 avatarRoger Stanyard writes: I suspect the fundamentalists have seriously damaged the reputation and standing of religion in the USA
______

The fundamentalists did that also in the late 1980's, and they came back from their disgrace (because of various high profiled scandals) with renewed vigor.

This time may be different, because atheists are grooming themselves in America to have political clout (which they did not do when the fundamentalists gave them a window to do that in the late eighties) via lobbies. In other words, when the fundamentalists retreat a bit, stop yapping as much, the atheists won't relax and say, oh, they woke up from their stupidity and now no longer present a problem.

So, yes, I think the fundamentalists will be in for a shock in the coming years.

Other Comments by Logicel

12. Comment #236199 by NormanDoering on August 24, 2008 at 11:16 am

King of NH wrote:
But what party is atheist friendly?


Obviously neither of them are. Did you guys hear about the atheists protesting at the DNC?

Links are in my blog post if you want to know more:
http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/08/rude-what-makes-some-theists-think.html

What party supports those of us that choose to give up childhood fantasies and actually propell the nation forward with moon landings, nuclear energy, improved crop yeilds, computers, genetic medicine, virus defense, and global aid (looking at you, Gates [thumbs up])?


Neither party is as strong as I'd like to see when it comes to supporting science and new technologies, but I think you'd have to give the Democrats a slight edge there.

And there is no connection between religion and anti-science except among the fundamentalist Christians in the Republican in party which confines its opposition to things like evolution and stem cells. A fundy could be all for moon landings, nuclear energy and even genetic engineering as long as its not done on humans.

Other Comments by NormanDoering

13. Comment #236240 by TIKI AL on August 24, 2008 at 11:53 am

How about an atheist in every politically active church recording preachers who tell people who to vote for, and presenting their evidence to the IRS?

Other Comments by TIKI AL

14. Comment #236247 by Pilot22A on August 24, 2008 at 12:02 pm

The only reason the so-called "Conservatives" are concerned is because some of the brighter ones understand that if religion starts getting to cozy with politics pretty soon the majority religion figures their flavor of wackiness is better and shoves the rest to the back of the burner - so, it's only in their best interest to want to keep it separate

There will never be meaningful separation of church and state in this country until religion and churches lose their tax exempt status - until then, everyone reading this post is supporting every religion in their town by making up the difference in property taxes and such.

Other Comments by Pilot22A
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: