*Sightings* 6/13/2011

— Martin E. Marty

Life is short, and if you want to spend what ¢â‚¬â„¢s left of it examining the
results of the latest poll of attitudes towards abortion, follow the link to
the Public Religion Research Institute and receive the unsummarized set of
findings. If you have other uses with that time and do not need a close-up,
you might content yourself as I did, on the principle that  ¢â‚¬Å“life is short, ¢â‚¬ 
by reading the faithful  ¢â‚¬Å“Executive Summary. ¢â‚¬  We leave to others the
discussions of poll methodology, contexts, and intentions, and plunge in.

Among those who keep up on this kind of venture, it will come as no surprise
that there are no surprises on a startling scale in the findings. Many of
them confirm hunches or provide data that will be of interest to partisans
who needed a bit more ammunition in the culture wars. At the same time,
there are some fresh insights and they deserve and demand attention. You can
be sure that political candidates, legislators, and judges will study them.
Thus, in bold type, the Executive Summary leads off reporting that in the
majority opinion of the polled, abortion should be legal in all or most
cases, while four in ten disagree. This proportion is reflected in all
religious groups, including the Catholic, except for white evangelicals, who
are courted by activists on the  ¢â‚¬Å“anti- ¢â‚¬  side.

Thinking of what this means in politics: almost sixty percent  ¢â‚¬Å“say that at
least some health care professionals in their communities should provide
abortion. ¢â‚¬  This time white evangelical Protestants are anti-abortion and
joined by Latino Catholics.  ¢â‚¬Å“White mainline ¢â‚¬  and  ¢â‚¬Å“unaffiliated ¢â‚¬  are most
 ¢â‚¬Å“pro ¢â‚¬  (at 72% and 71%).  ¢â‚¬Å“White Catholic ¢â‚¬  and (here ¢â‚¬â„¢s one surprise for me)
black Protestants, line up next (58% and 56%) as pro-abortion. Least
enthusiastic is the third duo,  ¢â‚¬Å“Latino Catholic ¢â‚¬  and  ¢â‚¬Å“white evangelical ¢â‚¬  (at
38% and 37%). One large gap is between the pro-abortion among metropolitan
areas (67%) and rural dwellers (39%).

In general, age is a determining factor, since the youngest cohort (18-29)
and the oldest (65+) are far apart, 68% to 42% pro-abortion. Leaders of
activist groups on both sides have their work cut out for them as they seek
to confirm and then enlarge the company of those who currently line up with
them. Battlers favoring or opposed to legal abortion can report little trend
change; twelve years ago 57% and today 56% of the polled thought abortion
should be legal in all or most cases, but those opposing same-sex marriage
can take less comfort from a trend: in 1999 only 35% of the polled thought
the law should recognize same-sex marriages, while the number is 53% today.
The younger group favors legalizing same sex marriage (57%) yet only 46% are
for legal abortion. The two controversial issues are not coupled the way
many observers expected them to be.

Can you go to church and escape bombardment pro- or con-? Just over half of
reasonably regular church-goers hear the subjects brought up there, but
Catholics are more likely to hear messages on the subjects than are other
church-goers. Is there wiggle-room? Definitely. 72% of  ¢â‚¬Å“religious Americans ¢â‚¬ 
think it is alright to disagree with their church ¢â‚¬â„¢s views on abortion and
remain in good standing. Even polled Catholics and white evangelicals agree
that it is alright or at least possible to disagree and keep standing.

Absolutists have trouble with majority views that they will see as
 ¢â‚¬Å“relative ¢â‚¬  since majorities may think abortion is wrong but should be
allowed. What can politicians do?

*References*

* *

Public Religion Research Institute,  ¢â‚¬Å“Committed to Availability, Conflicted
about Morality: What the Millennial Generation Tells Us about the Future of
the Abortion Debate and the Culture Wars. ¢â‚¬ 

http://www.publicreligion.org/research/published/?id=615

*Martin E. Marty’s* biography, publications, and contact information can be
found at  www.memarty.com<https://mail.google.com/mail/html/compose/static_files/www.memarty.com>
.
———-

This month ¢â‚¬â„¢s Religion and Culture Web
Forum<http://divinity.uchicago.edu/martycenter/publications/webforum/>is
Joshua Daniel ¢â‚¬â„¢s  ¢â‚¬Å“Cultivating Trust: Vulnerability and Creativity in
Moral
Education ¢â‚¬ : The insecurity of modern social life, marked by the constant
threat of  ¢â‚¬Å“human-produced, but often uncontrollable catastrophes ¢â‚¬”nuclear and
financial fall-outs, terrorist attacks, climate change, etc. ¢â‚¬  ¢â‚¬”inevitably
erodes trust in social institutions. But such trust, Joshua Daniel argues,
is the essential  ¢â‚¬Å“precondition for the sort of innovation ¢â‚¬  necessary to deal
with  ¢â‚¬Å“trust-corroding insecurity. ¢â‚¬  Daniel proposes that the cultivation of
trust  ¢â‚¬Å“requires cultivating a sense of and respect for the vulnerabilities
of others. ¢â‚¬  He especially addresses religious communities struggling to
achieve the innovation of tradition  ¢â‚¬Å“in the face of accusations of betrayal
and heresy.” With invited responses by Philip Blackwell, Martin Marty, and
Scott Paeth.

———-

*Sightings* comes from the Martin Marty
Center<http://divinity.uchicago.edu/martycenter/>at the University of
Chicago Divinity School.

Submissions policy

*Sightings* welcomes submissions of 500 to 750 words in length that seek to
illuminate and interpret the intersections of religion and politics, art,
science, business and education. Previous
columns<http://divinity.uchicago.edu/martycenter/publications/sightings/>give
a good indication of the topical range and tone for acceptable essays.
The editor also encourages new approaches to current issues and events.

Attribution

Columns may be quoted or republished in full, with attribution to the author
of the column, *Sightings*, and the Martin Marty Center at the University of
Chicago Divinity School.