Faith Plays Complex Role In '08 Race
By Kathy Frankovic, CBS News director of surveys
How is religion affecting this year's presidential campaign?
Voters want religion to matter in this election, but so far, no candidate seems to be benefiting.
Sometimes, voters misperceive a candidate's religion. In August, CBS News asked registered voters what they thought Barack Obama's religion was. Most of them - 84 percent - said they didn't know. But the largest number of those who thought they did know - nearly half of those who guessed any religion at all - thought Obama was a Muslim.
Many voters simply don't know much about some candidates' religions. As recently as this summer, only a third of voters knew that Mitt Romney was a Mormon. Nearly everyone else said they did not know his religion.
Whether or not the voters know much about a candidate's religious beliefs, they generally don't give the current crop of candidates any credit for having them - at least not yet. Republican Mike Huckabee is an ordained Southern Baptist minister, but just two weeks ago, when CBS News asked registered voters whether he had strong religious beliefs, about three times as many said he did not as said he did. Even self-identified evangelical voters don't see Huckabee as one of their own.
Huckabee's problem with voters is that he remains unknown to most of them: half couldn't answer the strong-beliefs question either way, and when asked for an overall opinion about Huckabee, three in four voters took the opportunity to say they were undecided or didn't know enough yet to say.
Religion matters to voters: two-thirds told CBS News in June that it was important to them that candidates have strong religious beliefs, even if they were not the same as the voter's own. And in October, 50 percent said it was important to them that a candidate shares their own religious beliefs. But it's hard to share beliefs with someone if you don't think he or she has any. We asked voters if other candidates had strong religious beliefs, and the most religious candidate was a Mormon, Mitt Romney. Voters think poorly of the leading candidates. Half don't think Fred Thompson has strong religious beliefs, and 68 percent don't think Rudy Giuliani does (fewer than 20 percent said that either Thompson or Giuliani was a strong believer). As for the current top Democrat, 74 percent - three in four voters - said they don't believe Hillary Clinton has strong religious beliefs.
But the good news for Clinton is that Democrats are much less likely than Republicans to say sharing a candidate's beliefs is important to their vote. Just 42 percent of Democratic primary voters say it is, compared with 66 percent of Republican primary voters. Two-thirds of conservatives care, compare with just one-third of liberals. Protestants care more than Catholics. But 66 percent of African-Americans, who are overwhelmingly Democratic, want their candidate to share their religious beliefs.
How does religion affect voters? The faith that an individual is raised in may impact that person's political beliefs and values. But some people move away from the faith of their childhood. In fact, in a 2006 CBS News Poll, although 30 percent of our respondents said they were raised as Catholics, just 20 percent said Catholicism was "their religious preference today." Fifty-eight percent of all those interviewed in that 2006 poll said their personal faith had changed at some point in their lives.
Religion mattered in 1960: Catholics overwhelmingly supported the candidacy of John F. Kennedy. But what is different nowadays is how religion matters: In recent elections, churchgoing Catholics vote more like churchgoing Protestants than other Catholics.
The vast majority of Americans (91 percent) believe in God or a higher power, and 59 percent pray often. The same percentage (59 percent) says religion is very important in their daily lives.
And many take the religious word seriously. In 2006, only 15 percent said they read the Bible or another sacred religious text daily, but three times as many told us they agreed with the statement that "The Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally, word for word." Many Americans take the Bible literally when it comes to their belief - or lack of it - in the theory of evolution. Forty-four percent agreed with the statement that "God created human beings in their present form within the last 10,000 years."
That poll, along with more recent ones, illustrates several splits between the religious and the non-religious, underscoring that today the intensity of one's religious beliefs can be more important than what those beliefs may be. Observant and non-observant voters have distinctly different views, not just on topics related to religious beliefs (such as abortion or evolution), but also on current political issues, like evaluating President Bush and the war in Iraq.
But Americans - even those who care the most about their religion - still have secular concerns. Although 60 percent of white evangelicals say they could not vote for someone who disagrees with their positions on social issues like same-sex marriage and abortion, the top two issues they want to hear the candidates talk about this year are health care and the war in Iraq, the same issues that matter most to people who are less religious.
By Kathy Frankovic
Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved. How is religion affecting this year's presidential campaign?
Voters want religion to matter in this election, but so far, no candidate seems to be benefiting.
Sometimes, voters misperceive a candidate's religion. In August, CBS News asked registered voters what they thought Barack Obama's religion was. Most of them - 84 percent - said they didn't know. But the largest number of those who thought they did know - nearly half of those who guessed any religion at all - thought Obama was a Muslim.
Many voters simply don't know much about some candidates' religions. As recently as this summer, only a third of voters knew that Mitt Romney was a Mormon. Nearly everyone else said they did not know his religion.
Whether or not the voters know much about a candidate's religious beliefs, they generally don't give the current crop of candidates any credit for having them - at least not yet. Republican Mike Huckabee is an ordained Southern Baptist minister, but just two weeks ago, when CBS News asked registered voters whether he had strong religious beliefs, about three times as many said he did not as said he did. Even self-identified evangelical voters don't see Huckabee as one of their own.
Huckabee's problem with voters is that he remains unknown to most of them: half couldn't answer the strong-beliefs question either way, and when asked for an overall opinion about Huckabee, three in four voters took the opportunity to say they were undecided or didn't know enough yet to say.
Religion matters to voters: two-thirds told CBS News in June that it was important to them that candidates have strong religious beliefs, even if they were not the same as the voter's own. And in October, 50 percent said it was important to them that a candidate shares their own religious beliefs. But it's hard to share beliefs with someone if you don't think he or she has any. We asked voters if other candidates had strong religious beliefs, and the most religious candidate was a Mormon, Mitt Romney. Voters think poorly of the leading candidates. Half don't think Fred Thompson has strong religious beliefs, and 68 percent don't think Rudy Giuliani does (fewer than 20 percent said that either Thompson or Giuliani was a strong believer). As for the current top Democrat, 74 percent - three in four voters - said they don't believe Hillary Clinton has strong religious beliefs.
But the good news for Clinton is that Democrats are much less likely than Republicans to say sharing a candidate's beliefs is important to their vote. Just 42 percent of Democratic primary voters say it is, compared with 66 percent of Republican primary voters. Two-thirds of conservatives care, compare with just one-third of liberals. Protestants care more than Catholics. But 66 percent of African-Americans, who are overwhelmingly Democratic, want their candidate to share their religious beliefs.
How does religion affect voters? The faith that an individual is raised in may impact that person's political beliefs and values. But some people move away from the faith of their childhood. In fact, in a 2006 CBS News Poll, although 30 percent of our respondents said they were raised as Catholics, just 20 percent said Catholicism was "their religious preference today." Fifty-eight percent of all those interviewed in that 2006 poll said their personal faith had changed at some point in their lives.
Religion mattered in 1960: Catholics overwhelmingly supported the candidacy of John F. Kennedy. But what is different nowadays is how religion matters: In recent elections, churchgoing Catholics vote more like churchgoing Protestants than other Catholics.
The vast majority of Americans (91 percent) believe in God or a higher power, and 59 percent pray often. The same percentage (59 percent) says religion is very important in their daily lives.
And many take the religious word seriously. In 2006, only 15 percent said they read the Bible or another sacred religious text daily, but three times as many told us they agreed with the statement that "The Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally, word for word." Many Americans take the Bible literally when it comes to their belief - or lack of it - in the theory of evolution. Forty-four percent agreed with the statement that "God created human beings in their present form within the last 10,000 years."
That poll, along with more recent ones, illustrates several splits between the religious and the non-religious, underscoring that today the intensity of one's religious beliefs can be more important than what those beliefs may be. Observant and non-observant voters have distinctly different views, not just on topics related to religious beliefs (such as abortion or evolution), but also on current political issues, like evaluating President Bush and the war in Iraq.
But Americans - even those who care the most about their religion - still have secular concerns. Although 60 percent of white evangelicals say they could not vote for someone who disagrees with their positions on social issues like same-sex marriage and abortion, the top two issues they want to hear the candidates talk about this year are health care and the war in Iraq, the same issues that matter most to people who are less religious.
By Kathy Frankovic
Recommended
- Top Twelve Most Patriotic Songs Ever
- Is 60 The New 40 Or Is 40 The New 60?
- Here's Why People Don't Buy Global Warming
- Who Lives The American Dream?
- American dystopia more reality than fiction
- What Obama Did As A Community Organizer
- Poll: Blacks See Improved Race Relations
- George Washington: First In Politics
Your description of my position is known as a "straw man fallacy." Very common among Christians to describe someone''s position as something it is not, to make it easier to attack. I do not support the "random" destruction of fetuses, and your statement that I do is simply a desperate lie. What I said was: If you believe the fetus has a soul, won''t it either (a) catch the express to heaven; or (b) catch the next train onto earth? Isn''t that better than (c) being born into an unwelcoming, ill-prepared or perhaps even violent home? There''''s just no good moral argument that favors taking away a woman''s ability to make a decision so vital to her right to self-dertermination and her right to protect the integrity of her own body. When we deny her that right, we know with absolute certainty the person to whom we do violence; when she aborts a fetus, she has quite arguably done it a favor. Surely, the religious are not going to tell us the aborted fetus is condemned to hell and therefore a legitimate victim? The only arguable victim of an abortion is the woman herself and she certainly should be permitted to make that determination. alanrobisch2, you have failed to explain, given your religion, how the fetus is a victim. You can''t have it both ways.
Posted by alanrobisch2 at 09:10 PM : Nov 02, 2007
People who purport to know God''s laws (the ones based not on reason, but simply written in a book thousands of years ago) and who make it a special point in their life to persecute gay people based on those irrational laws are called "animals." May they rot in hell. Christians might have a bit more credibility were it not for their evil conduct here on earth. They seem to think they can''t live by example, but must force their beliefs on the rest of us. And yes, you are wasting your breath. I categorically reject blind faith as the basis of any belief, especially those I would attempt to impose on my fellow human beings. Christopher Hitchens has a moral conscience and makes the average Christian look quite unethical. Read his book before you judge him: "god is not Great" (2007).
Posted by Candide777 at 07:44 PM : Nov 02, 2007
In other words the unborn to you is a worthless piece of tissue. It can be destroyed at ramdom and it doesn''t bother you. One of the basic tenets in life and the bible is to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. IN other words it wouldn''t matter to you if your mother had decided to abort you.
Posted by Candide777 at 08:34 PM : Nov 02, 200
If you think that christopher Hitchens is the person who should guide your vision of what is right or wrong I am wasting my breath. You have a stereotype of religion and it won''t change. People who use stereotypes to describe people and judge people are called bigots.
Ummm, if you''re asking whether I think I''m more informed than some of the primitive minds who wrote the Bible and believed the earth was flat, well, much as I hate to appear arrogant, I''m gonna have to say "yes." Now, if you''re asking whether I''m as intelligent as Einstein (who was not Christian), I''m gonna have to confess my ignorance and say, "I don''t know."
By the way, on this subject, you should read "god is not Great," by Christopher Hitchens. He has a fascinating explanation of how we as humans know more and more about less and less, but the faithful are the only ones who claim to know the "truth" with absolute certainty. There is a certain kind of arrogance that comes with "faith," which necessarily kicks the ___ out of any form of arrogance I can fathom for myself.
Posted by alanrobisch2 at 07:22 PM : Nov 02, 2007
I don''t remember seeing where the Bible calls abortion murder. Perhaps you can give me the cite. Anyhow, as I said, the fetus is not legitimately a victim and I challenge you to make any logical argument to the contrary. The fetus either gets a free pass to heaven, or it catches the next train to earth, and to a more welcoming family. Consequently, there''s no legitimate reason to take away a woman''s right to make this decision about her body and her fetus.
As for partial-birth abortion, do I support it? Do you mean, would I like to see more partial birth abortions? Don''t be ridiculous.
How do I reconcile it with no after-life? Easy, where the fetus'' rights (if you assume it has any) compete so intrusively with those of the mother, it''s quite obvious that the mother and NOT society, should make the call.
In other words you have no problem with murder of children. do you support partial birth abortion? Since you don''t believe in an afterlife how can you justify the killing of the unborn before they have a chance to enjoy the life you lead