Quantcast
Politics

Poll: Americans Split on Whether Homosexuality a Sin

NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- Americans are split on whether homosexual behavior is a sin, and many do not appreciate if a church teaches it is sinful, according to a recent survey conducted by LifeWay Research.

The random-sample survey of more than 2,000 Americans asked, "Do you believe homosexual behavior is a sin?" Forty-four percent said yes and 43 percent said no. Thirteen percent were not sure.

Being a born-again, evangelical or fundamentalist Christian often corresponded with a negative view of homosexuality. Among those groups, 82 percent said homosexual behavior is a sin while 14 percent said it is not a sin. In contrast, 29 percent of all other religious groups said it is sinful and 51 percent said it is not.

Men and Americans without a college degree were more likely to say homosexuality is sinful. Forty-seven percent of men said it is a sin, but only 40 percent of women.

And 49 percent of those without a college degree said homosexual behavior is a sin, compared with 35 percent who have a college degree.

"When asking questions like this to a general sampling of the population, it is important to note that people's definition of 'sin' may differ based upon their religious background and beliefs," Scott McConnell, director of LifeWay Research, said. "We intentionally used the word but also know it means different things to different people."

McConnell noted that in 2011, Gallup's annual Values and Beliefs poll approached the question of homosexuality asking if it was "morally acceptable."

"While we find 44 percent believe homosexuality is a 'sin,' Gallup reports 56 percent of Americans consider gay and lesbian relations morally acceptable," McConnell said.

Respondents in the LifeWay poll also were asked the question: "If you were considering visiting or joining a church, would knowing that the church taught that homosexual behavior was sinful impact your decision positively or negatively or have no impact?"

Only 26 percent of respondents said it would have a positive impact while 36 percent said it would have a negative impact. Nearly a third (32 percent) said it would have no impact.

Of those who said homosexual behavior is sinful, a slight majority (54 percent) said a church teaching it is sinful would positively impact their decision to visit or join. But among those who do not believe homosexual behavior is sinful, 74 percent said a congregation teaching it is sinful would negatively impact their decision to visit or join.

"Conversations about sin are inherently religious in nature," McConnell said. "Merriam-Webster tells us the use of the word 'sin' is religious or moral and often specifically refers to a 'transgression of the law of God.' It is no surprise, then, that the sharpest negative reaction to a church specifically teaching that homosexual behavior is a sin comes from the least religious, those who do not attend religious services."

Regarding the effect of a church's stand on homosexuality, the survey found:

-- Americans who never attend a place of worship strongly leaned negative in their response to the impact of a church teaching homosexual behavior is sinful. Those who never attend a place of worship were most likely to say this teaching would have a negative impact on them visiting or joining the church if they were considering it (72 percent) compared to only 21 percent of those who attend worship services more than once a week.

-- Younger Americans took a more negative view of churches teaching against homosexuality. Those 18 to 29 (19 percent) were the least likely age group to say that a congregation teaching against homosexuality would have a positive impact upon their decision to visit or join. Those 65 and older were the most likely age group to say it would impact their decision positively (35 percent) and the least likely to say it would impact their decision negatively (29 percent).

-- Men were more likely than women to look favorably on a church teaching homosexuality is sin. Twenty-nine percent of men and 22 percent of women said it would impact their decision positively. Thirty-four percent of men and 38 percent of women said it would impact their decision negatively.

-- People in large (44 percent) and small (43 percent) cities were more likely to say a church's teaching against homosexuality would impact their decision negatively than those in suburbs (32 percent) and rural areas (26 percent).

"Americans remain evenly split on the moral and religious questions of whether homosexual behavior is a sin," McConnell said. "It likely reflects different beliefs about Scripture and different beliefs about who defines sin."

The online survey of 2,144 adult Americans was conducted Sept. 23-26, 2011, among a sample of an online panel representing the adult population of the United States. Responses were weighted by region, party, age, race, religion, gender and education to more accurately reflect the population and provides a 95 percent confidence that the sampling error does not exceed +2.2 percent. Margins of error are higher in subgroups.

Get More:

Comments

111's picture

Americans may very well be

Americans may very well be split on the homosexuality/sin issue but God is not conflicted. Confusion, just like homosexuality, is the result of an overpowering depraved human condition (sin nature) and not one person in this world lives free from its consequences. Any deviation from God's holy standard results in a specific behavior that is condemned by Law and the biblical list of examples is extensive. In short, the power of homosexuality, like any sinful behavior, is a trap from which a sinner must be freed. Jesus Christ is offering freedom from sin to those ask.

Hebrews 4:12, 13

"For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account."

NedFlaherty's picture

Your deity may or may not be

Your deity may or may not be conflicted, but you yourself are not a deity, and you are not a human in whom all deities regularly confide. Consequently, you have no constitutional right to force your private religious views into civil laws affecting everyone.

Remember that your deity is not everyone's deity, your bible is not in everyone's bedroom, and to everyone from another belief system, your scriptures are only heathen superstitions.

When people of other faiths pontificate to you about their "God's holy standard" they are no less ludicrous than you are when you do the same.

And just in case your deity is the only deity, and just in case your faith is the only faith, then you’d best leave the supernatural judgments to beings with more insight and power than yourself.

111's picture

@Ned You are quite mistaken

@Ned

You are quite mistaken if you assume I've spoken on my own authority, I'm only a messenger. Take heed.

NedFlaherty's picture

Many messengers are far more

Many messengers are far more charitable, more scholarly, and more Christ-like than you. Many messengers are less hostile, less judgmental, and less indignantly righteous than you.

None of these messengers claims to be a deity, claims to know what deities think and want, or claims to speak on any supernatural authority, as you do.

These messengers outnumber you, and the quality and caliber of their messages are superior to yours.

111's picture

@Ned You read too much

@Ned

You read too much emotion into my post; you're overreacting. If you want to make a point then be sensible, i.e. connect the dots between my post and your criticism, e.g. "hostile" or "judgmental" or "indignantly righteous"...

You seem to value a Christ-like attitude and that's admirable but are you willing to subject yourself to the teachings of Christ in order to be Christ-like? Jesus said "narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to eternal life, and there are few who find it." (Matthew 7:14). The way to eternal life is so narrow and so difficult that only one person, Jesus Christ, can obtain it. Absolutely everyone else falls short. In this context, there is only one Christ and He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life and no one comes to the Father (God) except through him (John 14:4). Sound's pretty narrow? Jesus said that. He also said there will be few who find it. Why do you suppose that is? According to Jesus (continuing in Matthew chapter 7) it's because false prophets will fool many people into believing they're following Christ. Jesus said "Many will say to me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?' And I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'". That departure is eternal and devastating.

Back to my original post... lawlessness is sin. Homosexuality is lawlessness; so is adultery, fornication, divorce, lying, stealing, lusting, gossiping, being disobedient... the list goes on and on. No one has a clean slate and that includes me as much as anyone else. The answer to lawlesness is simple; become "Christ-like", put on Christ, escape the condemnation of sin. If a person truly wants to be delivered from the lawlessness that reigns in his flesh, he need only ask God for deliverance. God will freely and graciously make him a new person (2 Corinthians chapter 5). Christ is a light shining in a dark place, "And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil" (John 3:19). I thank God that I saw my wickedness contrasted in the light of His glory and crying out from my grave He heard me. He opened my eyes.

NedFlaherty's picture

Rick Allen wants the dots

Rick Allen wants the dots connected for him. Here they are.

Christianity is not the only religion, is not superior to any others, and is not followed by most humans, so pretending that it’s the only religion, and that it is superior, is ignorant.

Referring to “the” teachings is impossible, because even life-long, accredited scholars don’t agree on “the” teachings, the excluded books, who the authors were, etcetera.

The texts of Allen’s religious sect were written thousands of years ago — by many different men, but no women — and are contradictory and hypocritical to the core: they proscribe and promote human slavery, women’s subservience, stoning children to death, polygamy, animal sacrifices, and inequality based on gender, race, class, and physical ability. The books that Allen assumes are “the” teachings also forbid mixing fabrics, eating shellfish, and similar harmless, ancient practices. Those same books also describe two of the most loving, committed couples ever written about: David and Jonathan, and Ruth and Naomi.

Allen assumes — incorrectly — that sexual orientations are illegal in civil law. He is wrong. They are not. But he places his own phobia — other people’s sexual orientations — in a long list of unlawful activities, as if calling his own phobia “wicked” thereby makes it illegal. It does not.

Every major religious tradition in the world now has clergy who bless same-gender unions and who perform same-gender weddings. Even among Christians, the sect that Allen mistakenly thinks is the one and only sect, there are numerous clergy who refute his prejudices as nothing more than religious bigotry in an elusive chase after theocracy.

Allen proposes to define “sin” for all humanity. But he is not a deity himself, and no deity has engaged him as its channel to humankind, so his proposition is arrogant, and he is preposterous.

111's picture

@Ned I'll let you rest on

@Ned

I'll let you rest on that.

cityboy's picture

If we're going to allow

If we're going to allow religion to dictate any portion of our laws (an incredibly bad idea), I think we all should strictly adhere to what Jesus had to say about it in the bible: " "

Anyone who still wants to adhere to that passage in Leviticus had best be prepared to make sure they aren't in violation of any of the other prohibitions in that part of the bible. It specifically says in there that you are NOT to get tattoos - so logically we must deprive everyone with tattoos the right to get married. The same goes for eating shellfish, cutting your hair, wearing clothes with mixed fibers, planting a field with more than one kind of seed, or marrying anyone that's not a virgin.

Ed Flood's picture

This divide probably follows

This divide probably follows whether you're Christian or not.

FSC's picture

The question is not whether

The question is not whether homosexuality is a sin, but whether groups should be dictating what other adults do in the privacy of their own homes.

The repeated denigration of other lifestyles, claiming ones own way of life is superior is nothing more than pride and vanity. The Baptist press and others should stop indulging in their own deadly sins.

NedFlaherty's picture

Mentioned nowhere in this

Mentioned nowhere in this article is the shared cultural prejudice between Iranian Muslims and America’s older, less educated, rural, evangelical Christians.

Both these cultural groups want to keep one religion the federal law, and outlaw all other faiths.

Such discrimination has always been prohibited by the U.S. Constitution, which is why every one of the lawsuits challenging the mis-named DOMA (“Defense-of-Marriage” Act) is losing in both the federal trial courts, and in the federal appeals courts.

DawgWatcher's picture

Christian belief is we are

Christian belief is we are all born into this world a sinner.

Built 2 Grind .... Be water, my friend.

Roger47's picture

Jesus cured a gay man's

Jesus cured a gay man's partner: http://wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/gay_couple.html

Close x
Don't Miss Out! |
Like us on Facebook?