Hey Ryan. I was watching Crash Course yesterday and they introduced the concept of "mega identity" as a way of describing how political affiliation is driving so much else in current social grouping. I wondered if it was a phrase you'd come across and how common it is in sociological circles.
Your analysis is flawed in one major way: hermeneutics differs from politics. Black protestants and white evangelicals may read Scripture weekly, but they interpret the Bible very differently, and not just on minor issues.
History is instructive: think about the white plantation owners leading their black slaves in morning devotions. Or, today, Pete Hegseth quoting the Bible to justify hatred and violence in the Middle East.
Collapsing the two categories merely because a few habits are similar misses the substance of faith, focusing instead on proxy measures that often don’t correlate with fidelity to Scripture and, more importantly, the character of Jesus.
Thanks again for all you do. I comment because I so highly value your work, not to bring unfair criticism.
Black protestants and Evangelicals may look alike when measured by various religiosity measures, but do they come to the same conclusions? For example on female leadership in society and the church, same sex marriage, contraceptives, the proper relation between church and state, women in the workforce, etc?
Short version: Yes, American Black Protestants and Evangelicals are pretty similar in their aggregate political opinions on these topics.
Ryan has more on this topic here, where you'll see that while Black Protestants are more left-leaning on these kinds of social issues than Evangelicals are, Black Protestants and Evangelicals are closer to each other on LGBTQ-related issues than either are to any other religious group:
Please note, though, that opposition to contraception (within marriage) is not an evangelical or black protestant majority opinion. It looks like you have maybe confused the Catholic doctrinal and evangelical positions on contraception, or have equated "contraception" with "abortion"--the latter of which is generally opposed by most evangelicals, some Black protestants, and by Catholic doctrine (though not by the majority of individual Catholics.)
Based on your comments, it seems that the difference between black protestants and evangelicals at the polls is not caused by anything related to their religious teachings. What is it and why do they feel that the Bible has nothing to say about it (whatever it is)? This may be more a sociological question than a religious one, but it would show that, no matter how religious people can be, there are issues that are not touched by their religion.
I think there are a lot of ways religious beliefs could influence voting behavior, that will be strongly influenced by one's social and cultural background.
So as a hypothetical, you could imagine two people who have identical religious views on the moral wrong of abortion, but different voting patterns: one votes for a candidate who pledges to expand access to social services for poor pregnant women, the other votes for a candidate who pledges to restrict abortion. If I come from a poorer and more family-oriented and communitarian cultural background, I might think "abortion is wrong (as everyone knows!), so you'd only have an abortion because you think there's no way of supporting your baby (because everyone wants babies!). So the best way to reduce abortion is to make sure there's enough financial support for a woman who is pregnant but couldn't afford to take care of her baby." If I come from a wealthier and more individualistic cultural background, I might instead think "abortion is wrong. Lots of people don't want babies--which is fine and their individual right-- but some don't take the individual responsibility to avoid getting pregnant because there aren't sufficient consequences. So the best way to reduce abortion is to restrict abortion legally." In both cases, our hypothetical voter has reducing abortions as a top issue, but very different policy ideas about how to achieve that goal.
But more broadly, there are lots of moral issues to vote on, and while pollsters are extremely excited about surveying over prurient sexuality-related ones and rarely ask questions about boring things like taxes, workers' rights, or eminent domain, these boring topics are moral issues, too, and ones that people can also vote their faith on. I think there are lots of socially-conservative Black protestants who vote on economic-liberal positions (like maintaining/expanding social services, having a right to unionize, raising the minimum wage, and improving workplace safety protections) held by Democrats--which, I repeat, are also moral positions influenced by religious faith.
In my reading, he numbers in the graph don't support your claim. Black Protestants are more liberal on abortion than mainstream protestants to catholics, and closer to those groups than to white evangeliclas on others
While they may be similar on LGBTQ+ issues, we can see that they voted almost completely opposite in the last election. So, they must view real life issues (health insurance, SNAP benefits, basic worth of humans regardless of immigration status, etc.) completely differently.
It would be splendid to have one more question added to this particular article: how much do you resist sin? Maybe I'm a pessimist, but I don't notice personal holiness being emphasized by very many groups.
Re: the graph on "Who says each source is extremely important for moral decisions?", all four groups put practical experience in the top category, even above religious teachings. It seems "lean not on your understanding; in all your ways submit to him, and he will make your paths straight" hasn't really sunk in!
Hey Ryan. I was watching Crash Course yesterday and they introduced the concept of "mega identity" as a way of describing how political affiliation is driving so much else in current social grouping. I wondered if it was a phrase you'd come across and how common it is in sociological circles.
Your analysis is flawed in one major way: hermeneutics differs from politics. Black protestants and white evangelicals may read Scripture weekly, but they interpret the Bible very differently, and not just on minor issues.
History is instructive: think about the white plantation owners leading their black slaves in morning devotions. Or, today, Pete Hegseth quoting the Bible to justify hatred and violence in the Middle East.
Collapsing the two categories merely because a few habits are similar misses the substance of faith, focusing instead on proxy measures that often don’t correlate with fidelity to Scripture and, more importantly, the character of Jesus.
Thanks again for all you do. I comment because I so highly value your work, not to bring unfair criticism.
Black protestants and Evangelicals may look alike when measured by various religiosity measures, but do they come to the same conclusions? For example on female leadership in society and the church, same sex marriage, contraceptives, the proper relation between church and state, women in the workforce, etc?
Short version: Yes, American Black Protestants and Evangelicals are pretty similar in their aggregate political opinions on these topics.
Ryan has more on this topic here, where you'll see that while Black Protestants are more left-leaning on these kinds of social issues than Evangelicals are, Black Protestants and Evangelicals are closer to each other on LGBTQ-related issues than either are to any other religious group:
https://www.graphsaboutreligion.com/p/the-political-takeover-why-ideology
Please note, though, that opposition to contraception (within marriage) is not an evangelical or black protestant majority opinion. It looks like you have maybe confused the Catholic doctrinal and evangelical positions on contraception, or have equated "contraception" with "abortion"--the latter of which is generally opposed by most evangelicals, some Black protestants, and by Catholic doctrine (though not by the majority of individual Catholics.)
Based on your comments, it seems that the difference between black protestants and evangelicals at the polls is not caused by anything related to their religious teachings. What is it and why do they feel that the Bible has nothing to say about it (whatever it is)? This may be more a sociological question than a religious one, but it would show that, no matter how religious people can be, there are issues that are not touched by their religion.
I think there are a lot of ways religious beliefs could influence voting behavior, that will be strongly influenced by one's social and cultural background.
So as a hypothetical, you could imagine two people who have identical religious views on the moral wrong of abortion, but different voting patterns: one votes for a candidate who pledges to expand access to social services for poor pregnant women, the other votes for a candidate who pledges to restrict abortion. If I come from a poorer and more family-oriented and communitarian cultural background, I might think "abortion is wrong (as everyone knows!), so you'd only have an abortion because you think there's no way of supporting your baby (because everyone wants babies!). So the best way to reduce abortion is to make sure there's enough financial support for a woman who is pregnant but couldn't afford to take care of her baby." If I come from a wealthier and more individualistic cultural background, I might instead think "abortion is wrong. Lots of people don't want babies--which is fine and their individual right-- but some don't take the individual responsibility to avoid getting pregnant because there aren't sufficient consequences. So the best way to reduce abortion is to restrict abortion legally." In both cases, our hypothetical voter has reducing abortions as a top issue, but very different policy ideas about how to achieve that goal.
But more broadly, there are lots of moral issues to vote on, and while pollsters are extremely excited about surveying over prurient sexuality-related ones and rarely ask questions about boring things like taxes, workers' rights, or eminent domain, these boring topics are moral issues, too, and ones that people can also vote their faith on. I think there are lots of socially-conservative Black protestants who vote on economic-liberal positions (like maintaining/expanding social services, having a right to unionize, raising the minimum wage, and improving workplace safety protections) held by Democrats--which, I repeat, are also moral positions influenced by religious faith.
Race, most likely, which is correlated with culture.
In my reading, he numbers in the graph don't support your claim. Black Protestants are more liberal on abortion than mainstream protestants to catholics, and closer to those groups than to white evangeliclas on others
While they may be similar on LGBTQ+ issues, we can see that they voted almost completely opposite in the last election. So, they must view real life issues (health insurance, SNAP benefits, basic worth of humans regardless of immigration status, etc.) completely differently.
Very interesting post. Fascinating comparison! I'm glad you made the effort, and it was very surprising for me personally.
The research is impeccable. The analysis needs to be subtle and layered. Few folks are deeply knowledgeable about both groups.
It would be splendid to have one more question added to this particular article: how much do you resist sin? Maybe I'm a pessimist, but I don't notice personal holiness being emphasized by very many groups.
Re: the graph on "Who says each source is extremely important for moral decisions?", all four groups put practical experience in the top category, even above religious teachings. It seems "lean not on your understanding; in all your ways submit to him, and he will make your paths straight" hasn't really sunk in!
Thank you! Another great post. It inspired my post: "Denominations and Variation: What are we actually measuring?" https://timjclark.substack.com/p/denominations-and-variation-what