Public Religion Research released jointly with Third Way today Beyond the God Gap: A New Roadmap for Reaching Religious Americans on Public Policy Issues.  In today’s Huffington Post, Third Way’s Jim Kessler and PRR’s Robert P. Jones outline why we created this resource to help journalists, policy makers, and the public retire old stereotypes about religious Americans and politics.

From the Huffington Post:

“Insofar as Evangelicals have demonized gays and lesbians [they] should repent before God.” Was it Jon Stewart who said that? Bill Maher? Barney Frank? No, it was said by an Evangelical pastor of a Southern megachurch — a conservative who calls Mike Huckabee a friend. We live in a new era, marked by an aging and declining Christian right that is increasingly eclipsed by the Tea Party, a nascent but growing chorus of diverse progressive religious voices, and a broadening of political agendas among many people of faith. Maybe it’s time to rethink our assumptions about religious Americans and public policy.

That conviction is the guiding principle of a new paper called Beyond the God Gap, which provides a road map for navigating the complex terrain of religion and public policy in America….

These old “god gap” assumptions [the authors] encountered in our pasts were not atypical. Public conversations about religion and politics continue to fall into well-worn ruts based on stereotypes: evangelical Christians march monolithically to a right-wing tune; mainline Protestants are no longer relevant; Catholics in the pews affirm all official church positions; and the non-religious are moral relativists. But as we have discovered through research and in our own lives, the truth is more nuanced and interesting. And understanding this truth is heartening and essential not only for anyone hoping to make progress on specific issues such as gay and lesbian rights, abortion, and immigration reform, but also for anyone working to foster a more civil dialogue throughout the country.

Today, four religious groupings make up about three-quarters of the U.S. population: white evangelical Protestants, white Mainline Protestants, African American Protestants, and Roman Catholics. In Beyond the God Gap, we took a fresh look not only at political attitudes on key issues, but also at the underlying cultural fabric and theological beliefs that help explain attitudes toward government, voting patterns, and shifts taking place within each of these religious families.

Read the rest of the article at the Huffington Post.

The following article by Public Religion Research President Robert P. Jones is cross-posted from Newsweek/Washington Post “On Faith” site. You can read the full piece at the Post here.

_____________________

This weekend, conservative Christian activists will gather at the fourth annual “Values Voter Summit” in Washington, DC. Sponsored by Family Research Council and other conservative Christian and political groups, the gathering will feature prominent conservative Christians and other leaders and sessions with titles such as “Silencing the Christians,” “Obamacare: Rationing Your Life Away,” and “Thugocracy: Fighting the Vast Left-wing Conspiracy.”

With titles like that, there is sure to be good, perhaps irresistible, religious and political theater, but sorting out the realities from the rhetoric can be a real challenge both for reporters and for readers who hope to come away from new stories with a critical understanding of the current state of the conservative religious activist movement and its relationship to the wider group of white evangelical Christians for which it claims to speak.

Below are four recommended questions that readers should use to evaluate the quality of the upcoming media coverage. These recommendations are largely based on findings from our newly released 2009 Religious Activists Surveys, conducted by the Bliss Institute of Applied Politics in partnership with Public Religion Research.

Question 1: Does the story note that conservative Christian activists are only one kind of “values voter”?

Our recent Religious Activists Surveys, the most comprehensive comparative portraits of conservative and progressive religious activists to date, are an important reminder that the conservative Christian activists attending the “Values Voter Summit” are just one kind of religious activist with one set of values. There is also another group of religious activists, progressive religious activists, who hold their own set of values and who have been making their presence known in recent years.

We found activists on both the right and the left who were both politically engaged and more highly religious than the general public. Referencing the so-called “God gap” during his remarks at our recent press conference, Michael Cromartie, Vice President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, concluded, “Well clearly, from this data, the God Gap is not only closing, it is closed.” In fact, in our surveys, while conservative and progressive activists didn’t agree on many political issues, they did agree that progressive religious groups had wielded a greater influence than conservative religious groups in the 2008 election.

Question 2: Does the coverage give a nod to the important differences between the priorities of conservative religious activists and the broader group of white evangelical Christians for whom these activists claim to speak?

Activists are elites who close ranks easily, and their views rarely correspond in a one-to-one fashion with the more diverse and less predictable rank and file. The Religious Activists Surveys confirmed that conservative religious activists ranked only two issues as the most important for religious people to engage: abortion and same-sex marriage. While this narrow agenda has the strategic advantage of being focused and clear, it does not map cleanly onto the priorities of white evangelicals overall, who have broader political priorities. The 2008 Faith and American Politics Survey (FAPS), for example, found that white evangelicals did not rank abortion or same-sex marriage in the top five issues that were most important to their vote. White evangelicals overall ranked these cultural issues lower than the economy, terrorism, energy and gas, the war in Iraq, and health care as the important factors in their vote. This is not to say that white evangelicals do not have strong opinions about opposing abortion and same-sex marriage (even here, not surprisingly, activist opinions are more polarized than opinions of white evangelicals in the general population), but it is important to note that the priorities of conservative religious activists do not necessarily square with the priorities of evangelicals overall.

…

In the remainder of the article, I recommend readers ask two other questions when evaluating the upcoming media coverage:

• Question 3: Does the story attempt to understand the deeper cultural and theological influences underneath the issues?
• Question 4: Does the coverage attend to the role of younger activists and to generational differences that challenge conventional wisdom?

You can read the rest of the piece at the Washington Post here.

SURVEY SHOWS PRESBYTERIAN (USA) CLERGY SUPPORT LEGAL RECOGNITION OF GAY COUPLES’ RELATIONSHIPS, ORDINATION OF GAY AND LESBIAN CLERGY

SUPPORT CHURCH DOING MORE TO HELP MEMBERS CONSIDER GAY AND LESBIAN ISSUES

Contact: Dr. Robert P. Jones, President, 202-425-0277, rjones@publicreligion.org

For the PDF version of this press release, click here.

In recent years, the Presbyterian Church (USA) has been debating a number of policies related to the place of gay and lesbian people in society and in church life. The 2008 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) authorized the formation of a special committee to study the place of covenanted same-gender partnerships in the Christian community. The committee is currently collecting opinion from members and clergy on this important issue.

This release reflects findings from the 2008 Clergy Voices Survey (CVS). CVS, conducted by Public Religion Research, is the largest public opinion survey of Mainline Protestant clergy ever conducted. Because of the prominence of debates over gay and lesbian issues in Mainline Protestant denominational meetings in recent years, CVS included nearly 60 questions on gay and lesbian issues related to both public policy and church policy. The findings below represent the opinions of Presbyterian senior clergy currently serving congregations. The study included a national random sample of 411 PCUSA clergy; the Research Services Office of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) provided the sample.

Gay and Lesbian Members, Conversations about LGBT Issues in Church

Nearly two-thirds (64%) of PCUSA clergy report that they have lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) members in their congregations. Only 1-in-10 (11%) reports that they are not aware of LGBT members, and one-fourth says that they do not know.

Like other Mainline Protestant clergy, the vast majority of PCUSA clergy (96%) say that LGBT persons are welcome in their church. However, there is less consensus about whether “welcome” is equivalent to “full inclusion.” A strong but smaller majority (61%) of PCUSA clergy agrees that the gospel message requires the full inclusion of LGBT people in the church, while slightly less than a third (30%) disagree.

A strong majority (58%) of PCUSA clergy thinks that their church should do more to help members think carefully about LGBT issues. However, a majority (54%) also reports that their congregation has difficulty talking about LGBT issues. Barriers to better conversations are both theological and practical. On the one hand, there is considerable diversity of opinion among clergy on basic issues such as whether the Bible addresses what we understand today as sexual orientation; a majority (53%) says it does not, while 42% affirm that it does. On the other hand, clergy are weighing pastoral concerns. Clergy report that the top two barriers to having conversations about LGBT issues are concerns about creating divisions within the congregation (38%) and congregational discomfort with sexuality issues in general (31%).

Gay and Lesbian Church Leadership

PCUSA clergy strongly support LGBT persons in lay leadership roles, and generally support the ordination of gay and lesbian clergy with some caveats. Nearly two-thirds (66%) of PCUSA clergy agree with the statement, “Qualified LGBT persons should be eligible for lay leadership positions in our church,” compared to 29% who disagree (Note: The survey did not distinguish between ordained and non-ordained lay leadership positions).

Half of PCUSA clergy favor ordaining lesbian and gay clergy without any special requirements, and an additional one-third supports the ordination of lesbian and gay clergy only if they are celibate. Only 15% oppose the ordination of lesbian and gay persons under any circumstances.

Marriage and Civil Unions

More than three-quarters of PCUSA clergy support some legal recognition of gay couples’ relationships. Thirty-eight percent support same-sex marriage, and 38% support civil unions for gay couples. Only about 1-in-4 (24%) say there should be no legal recognition of a gay couple’s relationship.

When clergy are offered a religious liberty reassurance that the law would guarantee that no church or congregation would be required to perform marriages for same-sex couples, support for marriage increases 14 points to majority support (52%), support for civil unions falls to 24%, and the same number say there should be no legal recognition for same-sex couples (24%).

With regard to clergy roles in same-gender relationship recognition, PCUSA clergy are divided over whether they would be willing to perform a civil union or marriage for a same-sex couple even if it were legal in their state. A plurality (49%) says that they would not be willing, compared to 44% who say they would be willing. Seven percent say they are unsure.

Adoption

Approximately 6-in-10 (61%) PCUSA clergy believe that otherwise qualified gay people should be able to adopt children. Only 1-in-4 disagrees, and 14% say they are not sure. PCUSA clergy are somewhat more supportive of adoption rights for gay and lesbian people than Mainline Protestant clergy overall.

Changing Views on LGBT Issues

More than 4-in-10 (43%) PCUSA clergy report that their views on LGBT issues have become more liberal over the past decade. Nearly an identical number (44%) report that their views have not changed over this period. Only 13% say their views have become more conservative.

About the Clergy Voices Survey

The Clergy Voices Survey (CVS) is the largest survey of Mainline Protestant clergy ever conducted. CVS was conducted by mail between March 3 and September 15, 2008, by Public Religion Research and funded by a grant from the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund. Dr. Robert P. Jones and Daniel Cox served as the principal researchers for the study. The margin of sampling error for the Presbyterian subsample is +/- 5.3%. The full report can be accessed at http://www.publicreligion.org/research/?id=208.

###

Public Religion Research has a new article out in Religion Dispatches about the recent measures passed by the Episcopal Church authorizing clergy to provide “generous pastoral response” to gay and lesbian couples and allowing the ordination of gays and lesbians. Using data from the Clergy Voices Survey we demonstrate that despite conservative criticism about the approval of these measures they are entirely consistent with the views of Episcopal clergy.

Episcopal clergy are highly supportive of the idea that “God has called and may call” to ministry gays and lesbians in committed lifelong relationships. Nearly three-quarters (72%) of Episcopal clergy say that gays and lesbians should be eligible for ordination without special requirements. About 1-in-4 (23%) say that only celibate gay and lesbian people should be eligible for ordination, and only 5% say gay and lesbian people should not be eligible at all.

The views of Episcopal clergy are largely consistent with the views of clergy from most Mainline denominations. Among clergy in the seven largest Mainline Protestant denominations, all but two register majority or plurality support for ordaining gay and lesbian clergy with no special requirements. Episcopal clergy express stronger support than every other denomination except the United Church of Christ (UCC). Among the two denominational exceptions (two of the larger Mainline Protestant denominations), United Methodist and American Baptist clergy, only 33% and 28% respectively support ordination of gays and lesbians. Overall, 46% of Mainline Protestant clergy say that gays and lesbians should be eligible for ordination without any special requirements.

Tom Schaller over at fivethiryeight reviews our piece at Religion Dispatches.

The Obama campaign’s response to John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his 2008 running mate was to argue that the Arizona senator had ruined his narrative of being the seasoned, experienced candidate by coupling himself with an unseasoned novice. An online article in Religion Dispatches written this week by Robert Jones and Daniel Cox confirms the Obama camp’s assertion that McCain ruined his story, but suggests that it had less to do with the Arizona senator’s experiential claims than his ability to present himself as a non-polarizing, post-partisan politician.

Using numbers from a post-election poll, Jones and Cox conclude that Palin damaged McCain’s brand because her style evoked the kind of polarizing politics that Americans had grown sick of–and to which, not coincidentally, Barack Obama offered himself as an antidote.

To read Schaller’s full take, click here.

We have a new post up at Religion Dispatches that attempts to get underneath all the commentary on Sarah Palin by taking a hard look at the data. To read the full analysis, click here.

Sarah Palin’s abrupt decision to resign as Governor has raised a flurry of speculation across the political spectrum about her current political prospects and her viability as a national candidate in 2012.

Few pundits, however, have focused on what polls actually reveal about Palin’s appeal as a national political figure. The numbers paint a grim picture for the once rising star of the GOP.  At home in Alaska, the number of people saying they have a positive view of Palin has fallen precipitously from 89% in May 2008 to just 54% in May 2009 (Hays Research Group). By comparison, in the same May 2009 poll, 76% of Alaskans reported having a positive view of Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, who recently slammed Palin for deciding to “abandon the state and her constituents”. 

…

According to a national post-election survey conducted by Public Religion Research, the voting public was evenly split about whether Sarah Palin shared their values (49% agreeing vs. 45% disagreeing). Despite higher numbers identifying with Palin at the level of values, only 18% of American voters said Palin’s selection as McCain’s running mate made them more likely to vote for the Republican ticket. On the other hand, nearly one-quarter (24%) reported that her selection made them LESS likely to support the GOP ticket, and a majority (56%) report her selection made no difference.

The California Supreme Court today upheld Proposition 8, which repealed an existing California law allowing marriage between same-sex couples by amending the state constitution to restrict marriage to heterosexual couples. The role of religion in that vote has been the subject of much interest and debate, but solid data on religion has been scattered.

Last December, the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) conducted a state-wide poll to provide a more nuanced picture of the general election and Proposition 8 vote in the state. Public Religion Research worked with PPIC analysts to produce findings for major religious groups that were not made available in their initial data release.  We have released a new memo summarizing these findings, along with summaries of the NEP Exit Poll findings on religion and the Prop 8 vote.

The full memo can be found here:
http://www.publicreligion.org/research/published/?id=131

The following are the key findings regarding major religious groups and the Proposition 8 vote:

• The data show a more complex picture among religious groups than stereotypes often portray. For example, while white evangelicals were strongly supportive of Prop 8 (88%-12%), white mainline Protestants evenly split their vote (50%-50%). This finding resonates with the Clergy Voices Survey PRR released just last week of white Mainline Protestant clergy, which showed Mainline clergy more supportive of gay rights than the general population and largely in line with Mainline Protestant people in the pews. That study can be referenced here.
• The largest group of religious voters, those who occasionally attend religious services (46% of CA voters), opposed Prop 8 (54%-46%). Only those voters who attend religious services weekly or more (32% of CA voters) supported Prop 8 (84% - 16%).
• Supporters and Opponents of Prop 8 brought different motivations and value frames to the ballot box.  Supporters felt more strongly that the vote was important and were driven primarily by the desire to “preserve marriage” and by religious objections to same-sex marriage. Opponents felt less strongly that the vote was important and were motivated primarily by a desire to extend equal rights and freedoms to gay and lesbian people.

Overall, this analysis cautions against an overly simplistic view of the role of religion in the Proposition 8 vote.

Note: This article originally published at ReligionDispatches.org. Click here to read the full text.

There are different kinds of spiritual gifts, but they all come from the same Spirit. There are different ways to serve the same Lord, and we can each do different things…. If our bodies were only an eye, we couldn’t hear a thing. And if they were only an ear, we couldn’t smell a thing. But God has put all parts of our body together in the way that God decided is best. — I Corinthians 12: 4—6, 17—18 (CEV)

Third Way’s* recently released “Come Let Us Reason Together Governing Agenda” has sparked lively discussions about the policies it puts forward, but it has also cast in bold relief some tensions and factions in the growing chorus of voices that are politically progressive and religious. The two-year initiative set out to find common ground based on shared values between two groups that have traditionally been some of the fiercest political adversaries: political progressives and white evangelicals. Moreover, the project deliberately focused on some of the toughest issues that have been at the root of the worst political divisions of the last few decades (abortion and gay and lesbian issues) and more recent issues that have caused deep divides in the American electorate (torture and immigration).

Under the leadership of Rachel Laser, Director of the Third Way Culture Program, “Come Let Us Reason Together” has already accomplished two short-term goals: 1.) it has sparked serious conversations about the promise of this agenda to heal some of our nation’s deepest divides, including engaging in face-to-face conversations with members of congress in the Democratic Faith Working Group of the U.S. House of Representatives and with key members of the Obama administration; and 2.) it has highlighted an emerging evangelical center that is declaring its independence from the old Religious Right in important ways.

One unintended consequence of the project has been to highlight the existence of two streams in the left-of-center faith world. While these groups are not mutually exclusive, they flow from different sensibilities about public engagement and embody a significantly different spirit. On the one hand, some of the most vociferous critics of “Come Let Us Reason Together” have been constituted from a loose confederation of contributors to the recent book, Dispatches from the Religious Left, who generally portray a more ideological and confrontational public presence. On the other hand, the research for my own book, Progressive & Religious—based on interviews with nearly 100 religious leaders—identified a broader group of religious progressives who were largely uncomfortable with the “religious left” label and who are intentionally working to move beyond old ideological divides and build new coalitions.

Three differences between these streams are at the heart of the matter…

Click here to continue reading the full article from ReligionDispatches.org.