Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Seven Myths About the Religious Right (Slate)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Dob Bole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 01:03 PM
Original message
Seven Myths About the Religious Right (Slate)
Thought this article would be helpful, considering that there have sometimes been religious wars on DU.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2089641/

How Prayers Poll
Debunking myths about the religious right.
By Steven Waldman
Posted Friday, October 10, 2003, at 9:42 AM PT


I heard about this guy who called himself "evangelical," said he lived a "Bible-centered life," had a personal relationship with Jesus Christ … and voted for Al Gore over George W. Bush.

A confused, lonely, iconoclast? Actually, in 2000, at least 10 million white "evangelical Christians" voted for Gore.

Many people, especially secular liberals, misunderstand the nature of religion in politics—which is, to be fair, ever shifting. To them, if it's not about Jerry Falwell or Joe Lieberman, it's kind of a blur. So, just in time for another religion-packed election, here is a guide to sorting through some common myths about God and American politics:

Myth 1: Evangelicals all vote Republican. People often confuse the words "fundamentalist" and "evangelical." Fundamentalists are very conservative and almost entirely Republican because they view the deterioration of traditional morality as the primary public policy crisis. But fundamentalists are a subset of evangelicals, which is a more diverse group.

John Green, a professor at the University of Akron and the foremost scholar of evangelical voting behavior, spliced and diced data some time ago and managed to delineate a group of moderate evangelicals. I like to call them "freestyle evangelicals" because they are socially more liberal (they don't vote strictly for pro-life candidates, for example) and politically "in play." There are about 8 million to 10 million of them. This group went for Bill Clinton 55 percent to 45 percent over Dole in 1996* and 55 percent to 45 percent for W. over Gore in 2000. That's a swing of about a million votes.

And that qualifies them as a serious voting bloc in 2004.

Myth 2: The religious right flooded the polls for George W. Bush in 2000. Turnout among the members of the "religious right" (that's the goofy way pollsters make people self-identify) was 56 percent, says Green, only slightly higher than the national average—and actually lower than that of devout Catholics, mainline Protestants, and Jews. The "religious right" gets a lot of attention because a) to liberals, they are verrrrrrry scarrrrrry and b) their turnout has been on the rise in the past few decades.

But Bush's political folks view this as a huge target of opportunity. They were able to increase turnout among religious conservatives in the 2002 congressional elections through aggressive get-out-the-vote efforts. The 2004 election may turn in part on whether religious Christians behave more like they did in 2000 or 2002.

Myth 3: Bush's religion talk has appealed to his base but has alienated moderate swing voters. Actually, 56 percent of independents think he mentions his religious faith just the right amount compared to 20 percent who say he does it too much, according to a Pew Religion Forum study. Even most Democrats agree. Attacking Bush's religiosity will not be politically fruitful; alternatively, a Democratic candidate unable to discuss his own faith will place himself defiantly outside the mainstream.

Myth 4: In this era, no candidate would lose votes just based on his or her religion. The same Pew study tried to assess which religions carried the most electoral baggage. When they asked people if they would be less likely to vote for someone because of religion, the big losers were not Jews or Catholics. Rather, the groups with the most political baggage were atheists, evangelicals, and Muslims. (Interestingly, many even atheists didn't like the idea of voting for an atheist.) We have become a much more tolerant country, but that doesn't mean we don't hold religious biases.

Myth 5: Most religious extremists are in the GOP. Defining "extremist" as someone on the far end of the religious spectrum, it is true that most fundamentalists are Republican. But what about the other end of the religious spectrum? Statistically speaking, secular people (atheists, agnostics, etc.) are extreme, too, in the sense that they are well outside the public opinion norm. They tend to be Democrats. According to one study 60 percent of first-time white delegates to the 1992 Democratic convention claimed no attachment to religion.

Myth 6: Hispanics are conservative. The perception of Hispanics as conservative is misshapen by the political behavior of Florida's Cubans, who are indeed overwhelmingly Republican. But on the question of gay marriage, for instance, Hispanics were at the national average (54 percent opposed). Professor Green has found a big difference between Hispanic Catholics and Hispanic Protestants, with the latter group more conservative than the former. American Hispanic Catholics, it turns out, aren't that religious. Professors Louis Bolce and Gerald De Maio put voters into three groups according to religious intensity—"traditionalists," "moderates," and "secularists." Only 10 percent of Hispanics turned out to be traditionalists—this fraction in the African-American community was much larger. So, Republicans shouldn't assume that issues like abortion will lure large numbers of Hispanic Catholics.

Myth 7: The key to the Catholic vote is abortion. It is true that in some ways Catholicism is in flux. John Kennedy beat Nixon among Catholics by 54 percentage points, and Hubert Humphrey beat Nixon by 26 points; but Reagan won them by 21 points, and from that day forward Catholics were "in play." Clinton won them by 20 points in 1996, but Gore did by only 6 points. So, figuring out how to appeal to swing Catholics is important. While it's true that many Catholics are pro-life and dislike the Democrats' position on abortion, they tend also to be more interested in social issues, such as health care, and may be influenced by opposition to the Iraq war expressed by the pope and the bishops. For Bush, then, it's important that he still tout "compassionate conservatism," not so much to appeal to conservative evangelicals as to appeal to swing Catholics.

Some bits of conventional wisdom about religion are true. Republicans are also attempting to lure Jews, who are one of the few groups that vote "against" their own socio-demographic class. Based on their income and education levels, Jews ought to be voting Republican, and the GOP sees their strong support of Israel and the Iraq war as a way to make inroads.

So far Republicans have been far more sophisticated at understanding religious voting patterns than Democrats have. I suspect it's because religion gives the willies to a lot of secular liberals, who just happen to be the folks who run political campaigns and cover them for the media. Perhaps the biggest religion question of the 2004 campaign will be whether the Democratic nominee can talk about his faith without gagging.

Correction, Oct. 10, 2003: The original version of this article said Bill Clinton garnered 55 percent of the evangelical vote over Bush Sr. in 1996. In fact, he won those votes over Bob Dole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
damnraddem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hey, most religious extremists ARE conservative ...
We secularists are nonreligious extremists. ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brian Sweat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. I may be at one of the extreme ends of the religious spectrum,
but, as an atheists, I resent being lumped in with fundamentalists. The fundamentalist want to turn the government into a theocracy. I have no desire to turn the government into an atheocracy. I want the government to leave religion or the lack of it, up to the people.

If I were an atheist fundamentalist I would want the schools to tell children that there is no evidense that their god exists. I would want a pledge that said "one nation without any gods". I would want the phrase "in science we trust" on our money. I would want to put up displays touting the non-existance of any gods on government property.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nemo137 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
2. good article! i really enjoyed it.
you might want to look at it for copyright, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reachout Donating Member (236 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
3. Addendum
Or perhaps just additional information.

In the 2000 White House race, Voter News Service found that 14 percent of the voters said they attended religious services more than once a week and 14 percent said they never attended. The former backed Bush by a 27 percent margin and the latter Al Gore by a 29 percent margin.

So, perhaps the practice of religion has more to do with voting behavior than simple affiliation.



Also, I'm sure many people have heard of the "five questions" that pollsters came up with back in 1996 that were accurate predictors of voting behavior. For those who haven't they are:

Is homosexuality morally wrong? Do you ever look at pornography? Would you look down on a married person who had an affair? Is sex before marriage morally wrong? Is religion very important in your life?

If voters chose "liberal" answers (no,yes,no,no,no) on three out of five, the odds were 2-1 they would pick Clinton. The odds soared if they leaned left on four out of five questions. Those giving "conservative" answers went Republican, by precisely the same odds.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Larkspur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm Pagan and I Vote, dammit!
Saw the "I'm Pagan and I Vote" bumpersticker at Azuregreen.com catalog and thought it would be a good retort to the Xtian fundamentalists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kiahzero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Here Here!
We may not agree on candidates, but I can agree with that sentiment.

What bothers me are Pagans that voted for W., after he said that he didn't think that it was a "real" religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnnabelLee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
5. Dob Bole
Per DU copyright rules, please do not post more than four paragraphs of copyrighted material.

Thank you
AnnabelLee
DU Moderator
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
durutti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
8. Good Article
Edited on Mon Oct-13-03 06:05 PM by durutti
I believe that with the right amount of resources and devotion, progressives could get the bottom economic third of the population voting for them almost always, and the next third about half to three-fourths of the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsw_81 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-14-03 12:21 AM
Response to Original message
9. Sad
Attacking Bush's religiosity will not be politically fruitful; alternatively, a Democratic candidate unable to discuss his own faith will place himself defiantly outside the mainstream.

It is very sad to see that a candidate must pander to the superstitious masses in order to have any chance of being elected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyBrandt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-14-03 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Double sad
I'm as atheistic as they come, but this is just a nasty thing to say:

"It is very sad to see that a candidate must pander to the superstitious masses in order to have any chance of being elected."

It is, in theory, in hope, a Democracy. This is almost a parody of liberal elitism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onebigbadwulf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-14-03 01:10 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Atheists what?
Edited on Tue Oct-14-03 01:11 AM by onebigbadwulf
I don't know a single atheist that wouldn't vote for an atheist because he was atheist. Why wouldn't they? That is certainly a myth that it is a myth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC