A new survey released by the Center for Immigration Studies and conducted by Zogby International has received considerable attention since its release on December 29, 2009. Public Religion Research reviewed the sampling methodology and the questionnaire design because many of the results were inconsistent with similar questions from the American National Election Study (ANES). Dr. Robert P. Jones, president of Public Religion Research, concludes in the memo, “The CIS/Zogby poll has serious methodological shortcomings, and results should be viewed with considerable caution.”

More from the memo:

Most significantly, the Zogby poll is not based on a scientific random sample of Americans but rather on an opt-in online panel survey. Even though Zogby attempts to balance the panel to make it representative of the U.S. population, the fact remains that this self-selected pool of respondents (i.e., the people who agree to and have the means to participate in online panels) differ significantly from the general population.Why does this matter? Without a random sample such as a random digit dial telephone poll, there is no way to say that the results of this poll accurately reflect opinions in the U.S. general population.

To read the rest of the memo, click here.

Over the past few months, we’ve highlighted the way Public Religion Research findings are making a public impact and being used in a variety of ways–by denominational news agencies to clarify the terrain in debates about gay and lesbian ordination among Mainline Protestants, by newsroom editorial writers reflecting on strategic outreach to young voters, and by community leaders testifying about marriage equality in Washington, DC.

On Tuesday, November 17th, Public Religion Research findings were also featured in a gathering of an influential group of climate scientists and evangelical leaders who met with Senators on Capitol Hill to speak with one voice about the challenge of climate change. The Senate briefing “Scientists and Evangelicals Share Concerns on Climate Change (PDF)” was organized by the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School.

Richard Cizik, New Evangelicals president and leading evangelical environmental advocate, spoke eloquently about the moral imperative of addressing climate change.

I call climate change the ‘civil rights issue of the 21st century”. My father’s generation sat on its hands in the 1950s and ’60s when black Americans sought equal rights. Today, I won’t sit on my hands when the rights of millions and potentially billions around the globe are in jeopardy. God help us if we choose to pretend this can’t happen. We must act now, while we still have the chance. So must our governmental leaders. We will be held accountable.

Cizik buttressed his appeal with data from a recent climate change survey conducted by Public Religion Research and sponsored by Faith in Public Life and Oxfam America.

More than six in ten of all white evangelicals agree that climate change is making it harder for the world’s poor to support their families by causing increased drought and crop failure. A majority of Americans, including evangelicals, support addressing climate change even in our challenging current economic conditions.

Over 270 top evangelical leaders have signed the Evangelical Climate Initiative. To read more about PRR’s climate change survey, click here.

In recent times, much has been written about faith-based politics in the United States, and religious activists are typically at the center of such stories. Activists are literally where the action is in politics-the people who write checks, stuff envelopes, knock on doors, blog, and demonstrate on behalf of causes deeply rooted in their religious values.

Conservative religious activists, sometimes referred to as the “religious right” or the “Christian conservative movement,” are better known. They have become a staple of national politics in the last three decades, opposing same-sex marriage and abortion, and seeking to protect traditional moral values. These activists represent a long history of political action, dating back to the prohibition and anti-evolution movements in the early 20^th Century.

More recently, progressive religious activists, sometimes referred to as the “religious left” or the “progressive religious movement,” have received renewed attention. They have become more visible and organized in the last several years, working for social justice and peace, and seeking to protect the environment. These activists also represent a long history of faith-based political activism, including playing integral roles in the civil rights and labor movements.

To cast light on the important role both conservative and progressive religious activists play in American politics today, Public Religion Research teamed up with well-known scholar John C. Green at the Bliss Institute of Applied Politics at the University of Akron to field the 2009 Religious Activists Surveys, the first-ever mirrored surveys of conservative and progressive activists.

After we released our findings at a national press conference at the National Press Club on September 15, 2009, Dr. Green sat down with Kim Lawton of “Religion and Ethics Newsweekly” at PBS to discuss the implications of the findings for the future of religions activism, both left and right, in America.

To read the full Religious Activists Survey report, “Faithful, Engaged, and Divergent: Conservative and Progressive Religious Activists in the 2008 Election and Beyond,” click here.

The 2009 Religious Activists Surveys drew upon previous research on the conservative and progressive religious movements by the principal researchers on the study, Dr. Robert P. Jones and Dr. John Green. To read more, see their previously published books below.

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.

MEDIA ADVISORY

New Polls Highlight Religious Activists in the 2008 Election and Beyond

Leading Researchers and Commentators Discuss Findings of First-Ever Surveys Comparing Progressive and Conservative Religious Activists at National Press Club on Tuesday, September 15

Leading researchers on religion and politics, Dr. John C. Green and Dr. Robert P. Jones, will be joined by prominent public intellectuals E.J. Dionne and Michael Cromartie at a press conference at the National Press Club at 1 p.m. on Tuesday September 15 to discuss the results of two new national polls of progressive and conservative religious activists.

The 2008 presidential election saw energetic involvement by both progressive and conservative religious activists, groups whose continued political engagement is evident in the debates over current issues such as health care, climate change, and gay and lesbian rights.  These new surveys provide first-ever comparative portraits of two groups of highly religious, politically engaged activists who are often rivals in national politics and opponents on key issues of the day. Analysis will include demographics, civic engagement, general attitudes, and positions on major public policy issues.   Questions will be taken from members of the press and public following presentations.

The Religious Activists Surveys were conducted by the Bliss Institute of Applied Politics in partnership with Public Religion Research.

WHAT: Press conference and discussion of new polling on religious activists

WHO:

· Dr. John C. Green, Director, Bliss Institute of Applied Politics, University of Akron

· Dr. Robert P. Jones, President, Public Religion Research

· E.J. Dionne, Washington Post columnist and Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution

· Michael Cromartie, Vice President, Ethics and Public Policy Center

WHEN: Tuesday, September 15, 1:00 p.m.

WHERE: National Press Club Murrow Room

529 14th Street, NW 13th Floor Washington, DC 20045

For more information or to RSVP, please contact Peter Montgomery at 202-744-0941 or pmontgomery@publicreligion.org.

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.

We have a new article up at Newsweek/Washington Post’s “On Faith” blog about what the recent legalization of same-sex marriage in New Hampshire reveals about the intersection of religion and same-sex marriage.  You can read the full piece here.

One June 3, New Hampshire governor John Lynch signed into law a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in the state, making it the sixth state to affirm marriage equality. The passage of the New Hampshire law highlights the complex role of religion in the debates over marriage equality.

Mainline Protestant Dominance in States with Marriage Equality
First, there is an interesting religious-affiliation pattern emerging from the mosaic of states that have legalized same-sex marriage: Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont. Whereas white evangelical Protestants outnumber white Mainline Protestants in the general population (26% compared to 18%), white Mainline Protestants are the dominant Protestant voices in the six states that have marriage equality laws.

This pattern is consistent with recent polling that shows strong support for gay and lesbian equality among mainline Protestants in the general population. For example, white Mainline Protestants were the religious group most opposed (50%) to Proposition 8, which repealed the same-sex marriage law in California, and were more than four times as likely to oppose Proposition 8 as white evangelical Protestants (12%) (Public Policy Institute of California 2008). At the national level, only 26% of white Mainline Protestants oppose relationship recognition of any kind for gay and lesbian people, compared to more than 58% of white evangelicals (Public Religion Research, on behalf of Faith in Public Life, 2008) .

Moreover, recent polling indicates that in addition to Mainline Protestant people in the pews, Mainline Protestant clergy are largely supportive of gay and lesbian equality. The recently-released Clergy Voices Survey showed that nearly 8-in-10 (79%) Mainline clergy agree that gay and lesbian Americans should have “all the same rights and privileges as other American citizens,” up from 70% in 2001. And large majorities of Mainline Protestant clergy support workplace protections, hate crimes legislation, and adoption rights for gay and lesbian people (Public Religion Research 2009).

The Importance of Religious Liberty Reassurances
The legalization of same-sex marriage in New Hampshire also highlights a second major way religion plays a role in these debates: the relationship between religious liberty and marriage equality. Governor Lynch had threatened to veto the bill if it did not include language specifying that churches and religious groups would not be forced to conduct same-sex marriages or offer other services. While these religious liberty rights are already well-established in constitutional law, recent polling among Americans–particularly religious Americans–demonstrates a clear increase in support for marriage equality when laws include what we might call a “religious liberty reassurance.”

…

Read the rest of the article at Newsweek/Washington Post here.