POLITICS

One Nation Under God?

The latest NEWSWEEK Poll finds shifting American attitudes about religion and faith. Still, the U.S. remains a deeply religious land.

By Daniel Stone | Newsweek Web Exclusive

Apr 7, 2009

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

SPONSORED BY

A nation facing problems of biblical proportions appears to be looking less and less to religion for answers. According to a new NEWSWEEK Poll, the percentage of Americans who think faith will help answer all or most of the country's current problems dipped to a historic low of 48 percent, down from 64 percent in 1994.

The poll also shows changing perceptions about the religious makeup of the United States and its politics. Since Barack Obama took office earlier this year, the number of people who consider the U.S. a Christian nation has fallen to 62 percent, down from higher numbers during the Bush administration (69 percent last year and 71 percent in 2005).

Last summer, when George W. Bush was still in office, one third of Americans thought that religion played too big a role in U.S. politics, compared to 25 percent who said it had too little influence. The numbers have switched in the new Obama era. Now, 26 percent think religion is too influential, compared to 31 percent who say faith doesn't carry enough weight in the political system.

"It has to do with the context of the White House," says Larry Hugick, chairman of Princeton Survey Research Associates, the firm that conducted the poll. "When you talk about religion in politics, it usually has to do with the role of evangelicals. Bush was an evangelical, but Obama isn't, so people see the leadership of the country differently now."

Sixty-eight percent said religion is losing influence on American life, up from 58 percent in 2000, 39 percent in 1984 and 32 percent in 1962. Previous periods where more than 60 percent thought religion was losing influence included 1994 and 1968.

When asked about their attitudes on social issues, survey respondents revealed a continued shift toward liberalism. One quarter of those surveyed say school boards should be able to fire homosexual teachers, down from 51 percent in a 1987 poll. Those who claim to have "old-fashioned values about family and marriage" has also decreased 13 points in that time, to a current 74 percent.

Still, Americans' personal beliefs about religion haven't changed much in the last 20 years. The number of Americans with faith in a spiritual being—nearly nine in 10—has not changed much over the past two decades, according to historical polling. Seventy-eight percent said prayer was an important part of daily life, an increase of 2 points since 1987. Eighty-five percent said religion is "very important" or "fairly important" in their own lives—a number that hasn't changed much since 1992. Nearly half (48 percent) described themselves as both "religious and spiritual," while another 30 percent said they were "spiritual but not religious." Only 9 percent said they were neither religious nor spiritual.

Member Comments

- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: bkrummel @ 04/26/2009 2:39:19 AM

Under the 1st Amendment, the government CANNOT establish Christianity as the national religion, either through decree or by passing laws based solely on Christian values.
- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: bkrummel @ 04/25/2009 7:31:56 PM

Firstly, let me point out that I was not trying to discuss the teaching Intelligent Design issue, but acknowledging it as an issue of religion in education. I was trying to indicate that religion was not responsible for the failings of the school system and trying to move the education debate way from making religious people scapegoats and onto focusing on the real issue.

That said, Evolution is a scientific theory and Intelligent Design (which is just Creationism in disguise) is not. Creationism is theology, not science. Thus Evolution should be taught in science class and Intelligent Design should not. This doesn't mean Creationism is wrong or shouldn't be taught; it just means Creationism doesn't belong in the classroom. (Scientists make no claims on the Bible being right or wrong; they just don't study it.)

I think your post shows how little you know about Evolution. You sound like Mrs Garrison on South Park when talking about "fine humans came from little monkeys came from pond scum" (all you were missing is calling the pond scum a "retarded fish baby"). This is a rather ignorant view of Evolution. As for Lee Stroebel, he talks about the lack of evidence in the fossil record, such as transitional fossils, etc. Like all Intelligent Design people, he mostly makes a negative argument against Evolution. The fact is there is a body of evidence supporting Evolution, in the fossil record and in the behavior of microorganisms. Often there are complaints that transitional fossils, say between whales and land mammals or between fish and land animals, and often Evolutionary biologists will point to a recent discovery of such fossil records.
- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: bkrummel @ 04/25/2009 7:20:28 PM

The screen name was not "Obama is a bad president"; it was "Obama was not my president". You are certainly allowed to disagree with Obama's politics and policies. But he is our president and anyone who says otherwise or defends people who say otherwise are un-American trash. Learn to be patriotic!

Moreover, calling the President or Liberal "Marxists" and "Fascists" is crossing the line. We may disagree with their policies and think the policies are flawed and infringe on liberty. But these are well-intended, patriotic Americans and we should respect them as such.

As for hate crime law, this is a debatable issue and I cannot intelligently speak on the details. But know that Congress should not be infringing upon your 1st Amendment rights and you should be free to express the view that homosexuality is wrong. You concerns are valid. But the 1st Amendment does not give you the right to speak to encourage people to harm others and disrupt public safety. The the Constitutionality of hate crime speech is debatable.

We were not founded a Christian nation; we were founded a Secular nation. Our laws are founded based not on Judeo-Christian values but on what is necessary to provide a free and civil society. Individuals are otherwise free to determine morality and values for themselves. Under the 1st Amendment, the government establish Christianity as the national religion, either through decree or by passing laws based solely on Christian values. Non-Christians should not be forced to adopt the Judeo-Christian values that they might not share via laws. Moreover, Atheists are not destroying the moral fabric of society. Atheists do not advocate for immorality like cheating and in fact often encourage moral behavior. Moreover, they are making society better by defending the rights of people (homosexuals, non-Christians, women) from whom the Religious Right wants to take away liberty. You yourself say that "the great thing about the design of America is that all beliefs are welcome". Well, every time you suggest that American is a "Christian nation" or a nation for "a religious people", you are making it painfully clear that Atheists are not welcome. When you force us to pray with you in public venues like schools, you make us feel unwelcomed. Learn to follow the Constitution and treat Atheists with respect.

That said, the 1st Amendment and respecting people goes both ways. Some atheists have overstepped and tried to take away your rights. You should feel free to pray or celebrate Christmas in public, provided non-Christians are not forced to join in. You shouldn't be harassed for expressing your beliefs. Moreover, most religious people are not extremists. It is people who want to force everyone to act Christian like them and who want to force their Christianity into our laws and schools that are extremists and they need to be deal with. But this is not mos