Posted by: Peter Laarman & Casey Crosbie

It surprises no one to learn the extent to which American religious conservatives and progressives part ways on a range of issues, both theological and social. This is no less true in their respective activist communities, where both the Right and the Left struggle to make their public voices known.

A recent study, conducted by leaders in the field--John Green of the University of Akron and Robert Jones of Public Religion Research--merit close reading on this issue.  Not surprisingly, their study finds vast (and deeply intrenched) differences in the views and working goals of these communities.

Just a few of their findings:

1) Conservative and progressive religious activists have strikingly different beliefs about scripture. Nearly half of conservatives (48%) view scripture as the literal word of God, a view held by only 3% of progressives.

2)  Conservative religious activists are nearly universally opposed to legalized abortion: 95% say either that abortion should be illegal in all cases (60%) or most cases (35%).  In sharp contrast, 80% of progressive religious activists say abortion should be legal in all (26%) or most (54%) cases. 

3)   On the issue of same-sex marriage, conservatives overwhelmingly oppose (82%) both same-sex marriage and civil unions, while nearly 6-in-10 (59%) progressives support same-sex marriage, and another third support civil unions.

4)   Sixty-eight percent of progressive religious activists believe government should increase spending and provide more services; 89% say tax cuts should be directed toward lower income people.  By even larger margins, conservative religious activists believe that government should provide fewer services and cut spending (86%).  Sixty-one percent back tax cuts targeted at upper-income individuals.

These findings raise a number of questions:

    -Given the extreme differences, what is to be made of the much publicized struggle for “common ground” endorsed by Jim Wallis and others? Is this still an ideal worth pursuing when both sides are so clearly working towards different ends?

    -To what degree should progressives be willing to moderate their own positions to persuade conservatives to moderate theirs? Will such compromise strengthen the progressive witness, or weaken it?

    -Should organizations like PCU spend their energy attempting to reach out to conservatives?

Share your own thoughts on how we should proceed. Your input will help inform ongoing reflection among board and staff members of PCU.