Over the past decade, considerable research has emerged that
demonstrates the benefits of religious practice within society.[1]
Religious practice promotes the well-being of individuals,
families, and the community.
Of particular note are the studies that indicate the benefits of
Religion to the poor.[2] Regular attendance at religious services is
linked to healthy, stable family life, strong marriages, and
well-behaved children. The practice of Religion also leads to a
reduction in the incidence of domestic abuse, crime, substance
abuse, and addiction. In addition, religious practice leads to an
increase in physical and mental health, longevity, and education
attainment. Moreover, these effects are intergenerational, as
grandparents and parents pass on the benefits to the next
generations.
America's Founding Fathers understood the vital role that
Religion plays in a free society.[3] Far from shielding the
American people from religious influence, the Founders promoted the
freedom of religion and praised the benefits that it brings to
society. George Washington articulated this in his farewell address
to the nation:
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political
prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In
vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism who should
labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness-these
firmest props of the duties of Men and citizens. The mere
Politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to
cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with
private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the
security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of
religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of
investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge
the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.
Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on
minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us
to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of
religious principle.[4]
Given the extent to which religious practice promotes civil
society, understanding religion's contribution to America's
constitutional order is fundamental to the nation's continued
prosperity. The practice of Religion is a powerful antidote to many
of our nation's pressing social problems, many of which have
reached historically high proportions. Yet, despite the societal
benefits of Religion, the expression of faith in the public square
has faced many challenges. Therefore, legislators should seek
constitutionally appropriate ways to explore the impact of
religious practice on society and, where appropriate, recognize its
role and importance.
Religion and marriage
There are many indications that the combination of religious
practice and stable marital relationships contributes to a strong
and successful next generation. We already know that stable
marriage is associated with improved physical, intellectual,
mental, and emotional health of men, women, and children, as well
as equipping them with the values and habits that promote
prosperous economic activity.[5] Religious practice is also
related to positive outcomes for the stability and quality of
marriage.
Marriage. Numerous sociological studies have shown that
valuing Religion and regularly practicing it are associated with
greater marital stability, higher levels of marital satisfaction,
and an increased likelihood that an individual will be inclined to
marry.[6] Christopher Ellison of the University of
Texas at Austin and his colleagues found that couples who
acknowledged a divine purpose in their marriage were more likely to
collaborate, to have greater marital adjustment, and to perceive
more benefits from marriage and were less likely to use aggression
or to come to a stalemate in their disagreements.[7] Earlier research
found that couples whose marriages lasted 30 years or more reported
that their faith helped them to deal with difficult times, was a
source of moral guidance in making decisions and dealing with
conflict, and encouraged them to maintain their commitment to their
marriages.[8]
Divorce. Four of every 10 children experience
parental divorce,[9] but a link between religious practice and a
decreased likelihood of divorce has been established in numerous
studies. Women who are more religious are less likely to experience
divorce or separation than their less religious peers.[10]
Marriages in which both spouses attend religious services
frequently are 2.4 times less likely to end in divorce than
marriages in which neither spouse worships.[11] Those who view
their religious beliefs as "very important" are 22 percent less
likely to divorce than those for whom religious beliefs are only
"somewhat important."[12] The sociological literature reviews by
the late David Larson of the Duke University Medical School and his
colleagues indicated that religious attendance is the most
important predictor of marital stability,[13] confirming studies
conducted as far back as 50 years ago.[14]
The likelihood of divorce is even further reduced when husbands
and wives share the same religious commitment. Such couples report
having a greater sense of well-being and more satisfaction with
their marital relationship,[15] and they are less likely
to commit acts of domestic violence.[16] A study of couples with
divergent theological views showed that they were more likely to
argue, especially about financial matters.[17] Intermarriage
across major faith groups is also linked with greater marital
instability.[18] Furthermore, couples who share the same
faith are more likely to reunite if they separate than are couples
who do not share the same religious affiliation. In one study,
one-third of the separated spouses who had the same religious
affiliation reconciled, compared with less than one-fifth of those
with different affiliations.[19]
During the 1980s and 1990s, when religious practice decreased
overall,[20] the association between regular religious
attendance and marital stability became even more apparent. Those
who had ceased religious practice divorced 2.5 times more
frequently than those who continued to attend religious services.[21]
Paul Amato, a leading authority on the sociology of divorce from
Pennsylvania State University, concluded that a possible increase
in religious practice among some already existing marriages might
have offset the negative effects of the overall decrease in
religious practice among many other Americans. The rise in
religious practice in this newly worshipping sector between 1980
and 2000 brought about increased support for lifelong marriage and
counterbalanced, at the national aggregate level, two other trends:
the increased incidence of premarital cohabitation and the
increased work hours of married women, both of whichare associated
with decreased marital satisfaction and a greater likelihood of
divorce. Amato concluded that this increase in religious worship in
one subgroup was one of the main factors in preventing growth in
overall levels of marital unhappiness and proneness to divorce. As
a result, the divorce rate in 2000 was nearly identical to the rate
in 1980.[22]
Marital Harmony and Satisfaction. The practice of
Religion not only stabilizes marriage, but also improves its
quality. Brad Wilcox of the University of Virginia found that the
more frequently husbands attended religious services, the happier
their wives said they were with the level of affection and
understanding that they received and the amount of time that their
husbands spent with them.[23] Earlier research had shown that the more
frequently couples engage in religious practice, the more they were
satisfied with their marriages: 60 percent who attended religious
services at least monthly perceived their marriages as "very
satisfactory," compared with only 43 percent of those who attended
religious services less often.[24] A 1977 study indicated a
link between religious practice and marital sexuality: Very
religious women had greater satisfaction in sexual intercourse with
their husbands than did moderately religious or non-religious
women.[25]
Cohabitation.
Studies
consistently suggest that cohabitation is
associated with an increased likelihood of divorce. For example,
Paul Amato, confirming earlier indications,[26] reported that
couples who had lived together before marriage were 59 percent more
likely to divorce than those who did not.[27]
Repeated studies confirm the finding that those who attended
religious services infrequently and those who, as adolescents,
considered Religion to be of low importance are more likely to
cohabit as young adults.[28] Compared with peers who attended
religious services several times a week, young women who never
attended were seven times more likely to cohabit. Women who
attended weekly were one-third less likely to cohabit than those
who attended less than once a month.[29]
The religious practice of parents also affects cohabitation
rates. Those whose mothers frequently attended religious services
were 50 percent less likely to cohabit than were peers whose
mothers were not actively religious. A related research finding
reported that church-going adults tend to stop regular religious
practice when they begin to cohabit.[30]
Religion and family Relations
In general, religious participation appears to foster an
authoritative, warm, active, and expressive style of parenting. In
addition, parents who attend religious services are more likely to
enjoy a better relationship with their children[31] and are more
likely to be involved with their children's education.[32]
Moreover, the greater a child's religious involvement, the more
likely both the child and parent will agree about the quality of
their relationship,[33] the more similar their values will be,
and the greater their emotional closeness will be.[34] However, some of
the same research also shows that religious differences within
families can detract from the parent-child relationship.
Mother-Child Relationship. Compared with mothers
who did not consider Religion important, those who deemed Religion
to be very important rated their relationship with their child
significantly higher, according to a 1999 study. When mothers and
their children share the same level of religious practice, they
experience better relationships with one another. For instance,
when 18-year-olds attended religious services with approximately
the same frequency as their mothers, the mothers reported
significantly better relationships with them, even many years
later, indicating that the effects of similar religious practice
endures. Moreover, mothers who became more religious throughout the
first 18 years of their child's life reported a better relationship
with that child, regardless of the level of their religious
practice before the child was born. Mothers who attended religious
services less often over time reported a lower-quality relationship
with their adult child.[35]
Grandmothers' religious practice illustrates an
intergenerational influence. The more religious a mother's mother
is, the more likely the mother has a good relationship with her own
child.[36]
Father-Child Relationship. Greater religious
practice of fathers is associated with better relationships with
their children, higher expectations for good relationships in the
future, a greater investment in their relationships with their
children, a greater sense of obligation to stay in regular contact
with their children, and a greater likelihood of supporting their
children and grandchildren.[37]
Wilcox found that fathers' religious affiliations and religious
attendance were positively associated with their involvement in
activities with their children, such as one-on-one interaction,
having dinner with their families, and volunteering for
youth-related activities. Compared with fathers who had no
religious affiliation, those who attended religious services
frequently were more likely to monitor their children, praise and
hug their children, and spend time with their children. In fact,
fathers' frequency of religious attendance was a stronger predictor
of paternal involvement in one-on-one activities with children than
were employment and income-the factors most frequently cited in the
academic literature on fatherhood.[38]
Wilcox also traced the "pathways" through which Religion affects
fathers' relationships with their children and concluded that
religious affiliation and especially religious attendance have
unique effects that are independent of conventional habits of civic
engagement. The emphasis that Religion typically places on family
life, along with churches' family-focused social networks of
support and psychological support of fatherhood, helps to explain
why religiously active fathers are more involved in youth-related
activities.[39]
Domestic Violence. A small but growing body of
research has focused on the links between religious practice and
decreased family violence. For example, men who attended religious
services at least weekly were more than 50 percent less likely to
commit an act of violence against their partners than were peers
who attended only once a year or less.[40] No matter how the data
were analyzed, regular attendance at religious services had a
strong and statistically significant inverse association with the
incidence of domestic abuse.[41] Similarly, after
controlling for all other factors, Wilcox found that of all groups
studied (unaffiliated, active conservative Protestant, active
mainline Protestant, nominal conservative Protestant, and nominal
mainline Protestants), religiously active conservative Protestant
men were least likely to engage in domestic violence.[42]
Religion and Extramarital Sex
Religious belief and practice are associated with less
permissive attitudes toward extramarital sex and correspondingly
lower rates of non-marital sexual activity among adolescents and
adults.
Attitudes Regarding Non-Marital Sex. Numerous
recent studies have found a relationship between religious practice
and less permissive attitudes toward non-marital sex. Lisa Wade of
the University of Wisconsin[43] and Sharon Rostosky of the
University of Kentucky[44] reported that religious influence was the
strongest significant predictor of less permissive sexual attitudes
for both men and women. Wilcox found that, among both conservative
and mainline Protestants, religious affiliation and religious
attendance consistently predicted negative attitudes toward divorce
and premarital sex.[45] A study of trends in the Netherlands
covering a 30-year period also found that individuals who attended
religious services more often were less likely to be accepting of
extramarital sexual relationships.[46]
These recent findings support and expand upon earlier research,
such as a 1989 study of adolescents that found that youth who
attended religious services more frequently had less permissive
attitudes toward sexual activity and less sexual experience than
peers who attended religious services less frequently.[47]
Adolescent Sexual Behavior. Religious practice and
placing a high significance on Religion are associated with
decreased non-marital sexual activity. After parental marriage,
religious practice is probably the most significant factor related
to reduced teen sexual activity. Analysis of data from the National
Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health found that a one-unit
increase in religiosity[48] reduced the odds of becoming sexually
active by 16 percent for girls and by 12 percent for boys.[49]
Another study found that traditional values and religious beliefs
were among the most common factors cited by teens as their reason
for remaining sexually abstinent, second only to fear (e.g., fear
of an unwanted pregnancy, a sexually transmitted disease, or
parental discipline).[50] The level of overall religious practice
in a community also influences the sexual behavior of its youth:
The greater the level of religious practice, the lower the level of
teen sexual activity.[51]
In a 2002 review of the academic literature on the effects of
Religion, 97 percent of the studies reported significant
correlations between increased religious involvement and a lower
likelihood of promiscuous sexual behaviors. The authors found that
individuals with higher levels of religious commitment and those
who regularly attended religious services were generally much less
likely to engage in premarital sex or extramarital affairs or to
have multiple sexual partners.[52]
Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing. Thirty-seven
percent of births now occur out of wedlock,[53] with an
increasing number born to cohabiting parents.[54] However, given
the findings on the relationship between religious practice and
non-marital sex, attitudes, and behavior, it is not surprising that
regular religious practice is one of the most powerful factors in
preventing out-of-wedlock births. Rates of such births are markedly
higher among young women who do not have a religious affiliation
than among peers who do.
The level of young women's religious commitment also makes a
significant difference. Compared with those who viewed themselves
as being "very religious," those who were "not at all religious"
were far more likely to bear a child out of wedlock (among whites,
three times as likely; among Hispanics, 2.5 times as likely; and
among blacks, twice as likely).[55] At the state aggregate
level, the same phenomenon occurs. States with higher rates of
religious attendance have lower rates of teenage pregnancy.[56]
Religion and the Abuse of Alcohol and drugs
Numerous studies demonstrate a significant association between
religious practice and healthy behavioral habits relating to
cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs. Individuals with higher levels of
religious involvement have lower rates of abuse and addiction and
are more likely to find long-lasting success if they ever struggled
with any of these behaviors.
Cigarette Use. Harold Koenig and colleagues at Duke
University found that religious activity was inversely related to
cigarette consumption among the elderly.[57] The late Feroz Ahmed and
colleagues at Howard University found the same for African-American
women of childbearing age.[58]
Alcohol Abuse. Decades of research indicate that a higher
level of religious involvement is associated with a reduced
likelihood of abusing alcohol[59] or drugs.[60] The relationship
between religious practice and the avoidance or moderate use of
alcohol is well documented, whether or not denominational tenets
specifically prohibit the use of alcohol.[61]
Adolescents,[62] psychiatric patients,[63] and recovering
addicts[64] all show lower rates of alcohol abuse the
more frequently they engage in religious activities. For
adolescents, higher levels of religious practice by their mothers
are related to significantly lower rates of alcohol abuse, even
after controlling for religious denomination and the adolescents'
peer associations-two factors that also influence the level of
drinking.[65]
Drug Abuse. Just as with alcohol, religious practice has
for some time predicted significant reduction of substance abuse.[66] In
a comprehensive review of the academic literature on Religion and
substance abuse, Byron Johnson of Baylor University and his
colleagues reported that, in the vast majority of studies,
participation in religious activities was associated with less drug
abuse. Even in cases in which individuals used drugs, the more
religious were less likely to develop long-term problems.[67]
All of the factors related to a decrease in drug use-good family
relations, doing well in school, having friends who do not use
drugs, and having anti-drug attitudes-had an even more powerful
deterrent effect when teenagers were also religious.[68]
The more dangerous the drug, the more religious practice deterred
its use.[69]
Just as religious practice and belief deter drug abuse, Religion
also has a positive effect in the treatment of drug addiction. In
1994, a seven-year follow-up study of Teen Challenge, a faith-based
drug addiction program, found that the program's graduates had
significantly changed their behavior, in contrast to those who had
dropped out.[70] A Northwestern University study[71]
also found that Teen Challenge participants were more likely to
remain sober and to maintain employment than were peers in control
groups.[72]
Religion and Mental Health
In a review of mental health research that referenced decades of
social science studies, 81 percent of the 99 studies reviewed found
"some positive association…between religious involvement and
greater happiness, life satisfaction, morale, positive affect, or
some other measure of well-being." This analysis included a wide
diversity among ages, races, and denominations.[73]
Happiness and Well-Being.Happy peopletend to be
productive and law-abiding and also tend to learn well, thus having
a positive impact on society. A review of the research shows that
Religion significantly affects the level of an individual's
happiness and overall sense of well-being. In the vast majority of
the studies reviewed, an increase in religious practice was
associated with having greater hope and a greater sense of purpose
in life.[74]
Stress, Self-Esteem, and Coping Skills.More
frequent attendance at religious services predicts less distress,
even when controlling for the normal sociodemographic predictors of
this condition.[75]Similar findings hold for high-school
students.[76] For adults, a strong belief in eternal
life also predicts less harmful stress from work-related
problems.[77]A survey of African-American men and women
found that respondents who were more religious reported a greater
sense of control than less religious respondents. This greater
sense of control was, in turn, correlated with decreased
distress.[78]
Of the studies cited in Byron Johnson's extensive literature
review, 65 percent concluded that religious commitment and practice
lead to increased self-esteem, while more than 80 percent indicated
that religious practice correlates with increased social support.[79]
Membership in a religious community can enhance coping skills.
One study found that people were much more inclined to use positive
coping responses
when they received spiritual support from fellow church members.[80]
When like-minded individuals and families joined together in
prayer, mutual support, or religious practice, they viewed their
circumstances with spiritual significance: not only mundane daily
affairs, but also major life traumas.[81] In a study of high-school
students from West Virginia, the "ego strengths of hope, will,
purpose, fidelity, love, and care" increased as the students lived
out their religious beliefs more intently.[82]
Thus, involvement in religious practice, religious
organizations, and religious communities tends to lead to favorable
self-image and to foster the development of faith, hope,
benevolence, and a belief in divine grace as personal spiritual
resources.[83]
Depression and Suicide. Both public and private
religious practice protect against depression. People who are
frequently involved in religious activities and highly value their
religious faith are at a reduced risk for depression, according to
a review of more than 100 studies. This review also found that 87
percent of the studies surveyed concluded that religious practice
correlates with reduced incidence of suicide.[84] Levels of
depression were also lower for those who participated in religious
services than they were for those who only prayed on their own.[85]
Studies have found that adolescents who frequently attend
religious services and have a high level of spiritual support from
others in their community have the lowest levels of depression.[86]Conversely, a lack of religious
affiliation correlates with an increased risk of suicide.[87]
Immigrant youth likewise enjoy the benefits of a higher level of
general well-being when they attend religious services
frequently.[88]
Religion and Physical Health
Greater longevity is consistently and significantly related to
higher levels of religious practice and involvement, regardless of
the sex, race, education, or health history of those studied.[89]
For example, those who are religiously involved live an average of
seven years longer than those who are not. This gap is as great as
that between non-smokers and those who smoke a pack of cigarettes a
day. Predicting the life spans of 20-year-olds who are religiously
involved compared with those who are not yields differences in life
span as great as those between women and men and between whites and
blacks.[90] Among African-Americans, the longevity
benefit is still greater. The average life span of religious blacks
is 14 years longer than that of their nonreligious peers.[91]
Studies on the effects of religious practice on annual death
rates of various populations found that, after controlling for
variables such as race, death rates for an age cohort (e.g., men
age 59 or women age 71) were reduced by 28 percent to 46 percent
(e.g., from 100 deaths per year to 72 deaths to 54 deaths) for that
age group.[92]
An earlier review of 250 epidemiological health research studies
found a reduced risk of colitis, different types of cancer, and
untimely death among people with higher levels of religious
commitment.[93] Conversely, at any age, those who did not
attend religious services had higher risks of dying from cirrhosis
of the liver, emphysema, arteriosclerosis, and other cardiovascular
diseases and were more likely to commit suicide, according to an
even earlier review by faculty of the John Hopkins University
School of Public Health.[94] The most significant pathway by which
religious practice delivers these longevity benefits is a lifestyle
that reduces the risk of mortality from infectious diseases and
diabetes by encouraging a support network among family and friends
that helps to maintain a pattern of regimented care.[95]
Not only a person's own religious practice, but also parents'
religious practice affects personal health. Adolescents whose
mothers attended religious services at least weekly displayed
better health, greater problem-solving skills, and higher overall
satisfaction with their lives, regardless of race, gender, income,
or family structure, according to a study of public school children
in Baltimore.[96]
Religion and Educational Attainment
Because education is important for all citizens and the
government invests heavily in public schooling, any factor that
promotes academic achievement is important to the common good.
Academic expectations, level of education attained, school
attendance, and academic performance are all positively affected by
religious practice. In two literature reviews conducted by Mark
Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin,educational
attainment aspirations[97] and math and reading scores[98]
correlated positively with more frequent religious practice.
Parents' religious practice also counts. The greater the
parents' religious involvement, the more likely they will have
higher educational expectations of their children and will
communicate with their children regarding schooling. Their children
will be more likely to pursue advanced courses, spend more time on
homework, establish friendships with academically oriented peers,
avoid cutting classes, and successfully complete their degrees.[99]
Students in religiously affiliated schools tend to exhibit a
higher level of academic achievement than their peers in secular
schools, particularly in low-income urban neighborhoods. For
example, studies continue to find that inner-city students in
public schools lag behind in educational achievement, compared with
students in Catholic schools.[100]
The cultural values of a religious community are also a
significant pathway to academic success for adolescents. For
example, to earn a high school diploma or take advanced math
courses, children must plan for the future and structure their
activities accordingly. Religious communities typically invest in
forming an ethic of such discipline and persistence. A recent study
confirms both this indirect contribution of religious community
values and the direct influence of the students' own religious
activities in promoting academic achievement.[101]
Earlier studies found this same relationship between religious
practice and academic discipline. For example, in 1985, the
groundbreaking work of Richard Freeman of Harvard University
revealed that attendance at religious services and activities
positively affected inner-city youth school attendance, work
activity, and allocation of time-all of which were further linked
to a decreased likelihood of engaging in deviant activities.[102] For instance, youth who frequently
attended religious services were five times less likely to skip
school, compared with peers who seldom or never attended.[103]
education and Disadvantaged Youth. For youth in
impoverished neighborhoods, religious attendance made the greatest
difference in academic achievement prospects, according to research
in 2001 by Regnerus. As rates of unemployment, poverty, and
female-headed households grew in a neighborhood, the impact of a
student's level of religious practice on academic progress became
even stronger.
Regnerus posits that churches uniquely provide "functional
communities" for the poor that reinforce parental support networks,
control, and norms in environments of disadvantage and dysfunction.
In these neighborhoods, families are most likely to build pathways
to success for their children when they closely monitor them and
when they develop ties to local churches that expose their children
to positive role models. Youth in high-risk neighborhoods who
regularly attend religious services progress at least as
satisfactorily as their peers in low-risk, middle-class
neighborhoods:
Religious attendance was found to serve as a protective
mechanism in high-risk communities in a way that it does not in
low-risk ones, stimulating educational resilience in the lives of
at-risk youth. We argue that adolescents' participation in
religious communities-which often constitute the key sources of
neighborhood developmental resources-reinforces messages about
working hard and staying out of trouble, orients them toward a
positive future, and builds a transferable skill set of commitments
and routines.[104]
Regnerus goes on to suggest that religious affiliation had a
positive impact on educational attainment for African-Americans
residing in a high-risk neighborhood, even when controlling for
family structure, although its effect was strongest for youth
living in two-parent families.[105] The role of Religion in
building relationships and habits of hard work "reinforces a
conventional (as opposed to alternate or illegal) orientation to
success and achievement." Youth religious affiliation in
combination with religious families and friends serves to integrate
youth into the broader society and shapes their aspirations for
education and achievement.[106]
Religion and Community
Religious practice benefits not only individuals, but also
communities. Religiously active men and women are often more
sensitive to others, more likely to serve and give to those in
need, and more likely to be productive members of their
communities.
Compassion and Charity.Religious practice is linked to
greater generosity in charitable giving. In extensive research
documenting the relationship between Religion and philanthropy,
Arthur Brooks of Syracuse University demonstrated that religious
practice correlates with a higher rate of care and concern for
others. Compared with peers with no religious affiliation,
religious respondents were 15 percent more likely to report having
tender, concerned feelings for the disadvantaged. This gap was
reduced by only 2 percent when the effects of education, income,
marital status, sex, race, and age were taken into account.
The correlation between Religion and increased charitable giving
crosses ideological boundaries. When Brooks divided the survey
population into quadrants of politically conservative, liberal,
secular, and religious respondents, he found that the impact of
Religion on compassion applied regardless of the political
perspective. Religious conservatives were 6 percent more likely to
be concerned about the disadvantaged than were secular liberals,
while religious liberals were 24 percentage points more likely to
express such feelings of compassion than were secular
conservatives.
Among the general survey population, religious individuals were
40 percent more likely than their secular counterparts to give
money to charities and more than twice as likely to volunteer.
Among those who felt compassion for the disadvantaged, religious
respondents were 23 percentage points more likely to donate to
charities at least yearly and 32 percentage points more likely to
donate monthly than were their secular counterparts. They were 34
percentage points more likely to volunteer at least yearly and 22
percentage points more likely to volunteer monthly.[107]
Regnerus and his colleagues found similar correlations between
religious adherents and charitable giving in an analysis of the
1996 Pew survey on religious identity and influence. Individuals
with a religious affiliation were 30 percent more likely to donate
to organizations assisting the poor when compared with their
secular counterparts.[108]
The impact of religious practice on formal charity had
additional significance for community cohesion. Individuals who
gave to charitable organizations were 21 percentage points more
likely to give informally (e.g., to family and friends).[109]
Ram Cnaan of the University of Pennsylvania found that
congregations as communities were almost universally involved in
collective charitable outreach. In an extensive survey of religious
institutions in Philadelphia, Cnaan found that 91 percent of the
congregations surveyed had at least one community program that
supplied goods and services to those in need, including food
pantries, prison ministries, summer camps, and substance abuse
prevention programs. He estimated the replacement value of the
services provided by congregations in Philadelphia to be $228
million a year in the late 1990s.[110]
Violent crime.Just as the stable marriage of
parents is powerful in preventing crime,[111] so too is the practice
of religion. A review of the literature on Religion and crime
suggests that, compared with less religious counterparts,
religiously involved individuals are less likely to carry or use
weapons, fight, or exhibit violent behavior.At the metropolitan
level of analysis, areas with high rates of congregational
Membership and areas with high levels of religious homogeneity tend
to have lower homicide and suicide rates than other metropolitan
areas.[112] Similarly, at the state level of
analysis, states with more religious populations tend to have fewer
homicides and fewer suicides.[113]
Immigrant Assimilation. Religion plays a role in helping
immigrants to adjust to their new homeland. In research on the role
of the ethnic church in the social adjustment of Vietnamese
adolescents, including their educational success, regular religious
attendance was found to increase the likelihood that youth would
attend after-school classes, as well as the likelihood that they
would retain their ethnic cohesion. Even after controlling for
other variables, these activities and religious service attendance
correlated with better grades, avoidance of substance abuse, and
the importance attached to attending college-all of which aided
their successful integration into American society.[114] Thus, religious practice was a
significant bridge from their culture of origin to success in their
new homeland.
Religion and At-Risk Youth
Even against the odds, in neighborhoods of disorder and poverty,
religious practice serves as a significant buffer against drug
abuse and juvenile delinquency. A study of 2,358 young black males
from impoverished inner-city Chicago and Philadelphia found that a
high level of religious attendance was associated with a 46 percent
reduction in the likelihood of using drugs, a 57 percent reduction
in the probability of dealing drugs, and a 39 percent decrease in
the likelihood of committing a crime that was not drug-related.
Thus, religious attendance was associated with direct decreases in
both minor and major forms of crime and deviance to an extent
unrivalled by government welfare programs.[115]
The effect of Religion is not solely a matter of external
controls that curb adolescents' risky behavior. Rather, religious
attendance also promotes self-control, a positive allocation of
time, attendance at school, and engagement in work.[116]In addition, youth religious practice is
linked to a decreased likelihood of associating with delinquent
peers-a significant factor in youth crime.[117]
Drug Use in Inner-City Neighborhoods.While
religious practice appears to have a general restraining effect on
the likelihood of using drugs, this effect appears to be especially
strong for adolescents living in higher-risk neighborhoods, where
increased religious practice coincides with substantially decreased
drug use.[118] African-American youth living in
impoverished urban neighborhoods who attended religious services at
least weekly were half as likely to use illicit drugs as those who
never attended.[119] Furthermore, an analysis of national
longitudinal data indicates that religious youth from low-income
neighborhoods are not only less likely than non-religious
neighborhood peers to use illegal drugs, but also less likely than
peers in "good" neighborhoods who have low levels of religious
commitment.[120] In preventing drug abuse, religious
practice trumps socioeconomic disadvantage.
Juvenile Delinquency. In at-risk, destabilized
communities, religious practice was found to be a buffer against
youth crime in the same way that it reduced the likelihood of
substance abuse among adolescents. Even in communities where there
are no strong social controls against delinquent behavior,
religious commitment and involvement protects youth from antisocial
behavior-both minor and serious. In the Add Health Survey, a major
national survey of adolescents, a 6 percent reduction in
delinquency was associated with a one-point increase on an index
that combined adolescents' frequency of religious service with
their rating of the importance of religion.[121]
Mothers' religious practice is also an influence in reducing the
likelihood that children will become delinquent. Each unit increase
in a mother's religious practice is associated with a 9 percent
decline in her child's delinquency. The adolescents at lowest risk
for delinquency typically have highly religious mothers and are
themselves highly religious.[122] Even in cases in which
young people have become involved in deviant behavior, specific
types of religious activity can help to steer them back on the
right course and away from further criminal activity. In addition,
evidence indicates that religious involvement during adolescence
has a cumulative effect and thus may significantly reduce the
likelihood that a young person will commit crimes in adulthood.[123]
Negative Outcomes
The vast majority of the studies reviewed give evidence of
numerous societal benefits of religious belief and practice.
However, relatively few studies indicate some unintended negative
outcomes.
Religion and Sexual Behavior. Although frequent religious
attendance is highly correlated with less sexual activity among
those who are not married, some religiously observant individuals
do become sexually active. These individuals tend to use
contraception less and thus do not have the protection of
abstinence or barriers to prevent pregnancy or infection.
[124] Among adolescent males from divorced
families, there are indications of a positive correlation between
frequent church attendance and an increased number of sexual
partners. This relationship, however, does not appear among female
adolescents from divorced families.
[125] Motivation for
Religious Practice. Researchers cite two types of motivation for
religious practice: intrinsic and extrinsic.
[126] Intrinsic and
extrinsic motivations for religious practice seem to result in two
very different types of outcomes.
Intrinsic motivation is related to moral standards,
conscientiousness, discipline, responsibility, and consistency.[127] Those who are intrinsically motivated
(intrinsics) are likely to be more sensitive to others and more
understanding of their own emotions. They tend to have a greater
sense of responsibility, are more self-motivated, and have greater
internal control.
By contrast, extrinsic motivation relies on secular benefits
such as those derived from religious affiliation and is often
linked to self-indulgence, indolence, and a lack of dependability.
Such individuals (extrinsics) are more likely to be dogmatic,
authoritarian, and less responsible. They also tend to have less
internal control and are less self-directed.[128] Furthermore,
numerous findings link extrinsic religious motivation to similar,
self-centered behaviors.[129] For example, studies documenting racial
prejudice among church members found that those who are the most
racially prejudiced either attend religious services infrequently
or are extrinsically motivated and practice Religion simply as a
means for fulfilling their own ends (e.g., Membership in a social
group) rather than for prayer and worship.
In general, extrinsics have more anxiety about life's ups and
downs than intrinsics do. Intrinsics' religious beliefs and
practices are more integrated and consistent. For instance, they
are more likely to attend public religious services and pray
privately. By contrast, those who pray only privately and do not
attend public religious services tend to have a higher level of
general anxiety, a characteristic typical of extrinsics.[130] One set of findings on anxiety about
death showed that extrinsics fared worse than intrinsic believers,
but also worse than those who do not profess religious belief.[131] All of these findings confirm the
conclusion in 1968 of Gordon Allport, then professor of psychology
at Harvard University: "I feel equally sure that mental health is
facilitated by an intrinsic, but not an extrinsic, religious
orientation."[132]
Despite some findings indicating the occasional negative
outcomes, the vast majority of research studies cite the positive
effects of religious practice. Typically, findings of negative
effects are linked to specific circumstances related to particular
forms of religious practice, most of which could be described as
"malpractice" of religion.
Summary and Policy Implications
Strong and repeated evidence indicates that the regular practice
of Religion has beneficial effects in nearly every aspect of social
concern and policy. This evidence shows that religious practice
protects against social disorder and dysfunction.
Specifically, the available data clearly indicate that religious
belief and practice are associated with:
- Higher levels of marital happiness and stability;
- Stronger parent-child relationships;
- Greater educational aspirations and attainment, especially
among the poor;
- Higher levels of good work habits;
- Greater longevity and physical health;
- Higher levels of well-being and happiness;
- Higher recovery rates from addictions to alcohol or drugs;
- Higher levels of self-control, self-esteem, and coping
skills;
- Higher rates of charitable donations and volunteering; and
- Higher levels of community cohesion and social support for
those in need.
The evidence further demonstrates that religious belief and
practice are also associated with:
- Lower divorce rates:
- Lower cohabitation rates;
- Lower rates of out-of-wedlock births;
- Lower levels of teen sexual activity;
- Less abuse of alcohol and drugs;
- Lower rates of suicide, depression, and suicide ideation;
- Lower levels of many infectious diseases;
- Less juvenile crime;
- Less violent crime; and
- Less domestic violence.
No other dimension of life in America-with the exception of
stable marriages and families, which in turn are strongly tied to
religious practice-does more to promote the well-being and
soundness of the nation's civil society than citizens' religious
observance. As George Washington asserted, the success of the
Republic depends on the practice of Religion by its citizens. These
findings from 21st century social science support his
observation.
What Policymakers Should Do
The original intent of the Founding Fathers was not to bar
Religion from the public arena, but to guard against the federal
government's establishment of a particular state-approved
church.
At the federal, state, and local levels, policymakers should work
to encourage an environment in which religious institutions and
organizations can thrive and citizens can actively practice their
faith-both privately and publicly. In doing so, government entities
can remain neutral with regard to particular faiths while still
respecting the rights of citizens who are not affiliated with any
Religion or faith.
Specifically, Congress should:
- Pass a sense of Congress resolution finding that data on
religious practice are useful to policymakers and researchers who
inform the public debate. Such a resolution would remove
the misconception that legislators are not permitted to be
concerned with the religious dimension of life. In the words of the
late Justice William O. Douglas (who was not considered a
conservative on the Supreme Court):
We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a
Supreme Being. We guarantee the freedom to worship as one chooses.
[When] the state encourages religious instruction or cooperates
with religious authorities by adjusting the schedule of public
events to sectarian needs, [it] respects the religious nature of
our people and accommodates the public service to their spiritual
needs. To hold that it may not would be to find in the Constitution
a requirement that the government show a callous indifference to
religious groups. That would be preferring those who believe in no
Religion over those who do believe.[133]
- Ensure the collection of better information from existing
periodic national surveys on the prevalence of religious practice
and the association between Religion and societal
well-being.For instance, the American Community Survey and the
Census Bureau's March Supplement to the Current Population Survey
should be augmented to include a measure of the level of
respondents' religious practice. This would permit an analysis of
the effect of religious practice on the myriad aspects of national
life that are studied.
In general, policymakers also should:
- Become acquainted with research showing that religious
practice serves the common good. This should inform their
policy decision-making and equip them to lead an ongoing national
discussion on the vital and constructive role of Religion in
American life. The purpose of this dialogue would not be to enact
legislation, but to highlight through public discourse the
association between religious belief and practice and the
well-being of American society. Such discussions would promote
understanding, appreciation, and cooperation among citizens of
different faiths while simultaneously respecting the freedom of
those who do not have a religious affiliation or an inclination to
practice any religion.
- Consider the evidence on the effectiveness of faith-based
approaches to social problems.Faith-based social service
ministries have unique competencies in addressing some of the most
difficult social problems. By some estimates, these organizations
provide $20 billion worth of privately funded social service
delivery for more than 70 million Americans each year. There are
significant indications that faith-based social service programs
are more effective than their secular counterparts.
A comprehensive review of the literature on the effectiveness of
faith-based organizations contrasted the impacts of secular and
faith-based programs in different service areas, from the treatment
of addictions to "re-entry to society" programs for former
prisoners.[134] In all but one of the 11 multivariate
studies reviewed, faith-based programs were significantly more
effective than secular counterparts.[135] These effective
faith-based ministries have the potential to reduce dependency on
government services, and policymakers should consider how to create
an environment in which they can operate freely and to greatest
effect.
Conclusion
A steadily increasing body of evidence from the social sciences
demonstrates that regular religious practice benefits individuals,
families, and communities, and thus the nation as a whole. The
practice of Religion improves health, academic achievement, and
economic well-being and fosters self-control, self-esteem, empathy,
and compassion.
Religious belief and practice can address many of the nation's
most pressing social problems, some of which have reached serious
levels (e.g., out-of-wedlock births and family dissolution).
Research has linked the practice of Religion to reductions in the
incidence of divorce, crime, delinquency, drug and alcohol
addiction, out-of-wedlock births, health problems, anxiety, and
prejudice. Faith-based outreach has been uniquely effective in drug
addiction rehabilitation and societal re-entry programs for
prisoners. Furthermore, the effects of religious belief and
practice are intergenerational and cumulative. In a sense, they
"compound the interest>" of our social capital.
Allan Bergin, a research psychologist who received the American
Psychological Association's top award in 1990, summed up the impact
of Religion in his acceptance address: "Some religious influences
have a modest impact whereas another portion seems like the mental
equivalent of nuclear energy."[136]
Freedom from an established Religion is compatible with the
freedom to fully practice one's religious beliefs. This freedom is
very different from purported protection from religious
influence. To work to reduce the influence of religious belief or
practice is to further the disintegration of society. Some may be
uncomfortable with the religious beliefs and practices of others,
but that discomfort is small compared to the effects of having a
society with little or no religious practice. America's ongoing
national experiment with freedom now faces anew the challenge of
balancing society's need for the benefits that Religion brings, its
commitment to religious pluralism in the political order, and the
rights of those who choose to live with no religious
conviction.
Our Founding Fathers, in their dedication to liberty, promoted
the freedom of all Americans to practice religious beliefs, or not,
as they choose. Although the freedom not to practice Religion is
intrinsic to religious freedom, that protection does not mean that
this non-practice of Religion is equally beneficial to society.
Social science data reinforce George Washington's declaration in
his farewell address: "Of all the dispositions and habits which
lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are
indispensable supports."
Patrick F. Fagan is
William H. G. FitzGerald Research Fellow in Family and Cultural
Issues in the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Religion and Civil
Society at The Heritage Foundation.
[1] This paper is an update of Patrick F.
Fagan, "Why Religion Matters: The Impact of Religious Practice on
Social Stability," Heritage Foundation
Backgrounder No.
1064, January 15, 1996, at
. See also Bill Broadway, "The Social Blessings of Believing:
Heritage Foundation Report Urges Policymakers to Explore the
Practical Benefits of Religious Practice,"
The Washington
Post, February 10, 1996, p. B7.
[2] See Diane R. Brown and Lawrence E. Gary,
"Religious Socialization and Educational Attainment Among African
Americans: An Empirical Assessment," Journal of Negro
Education, Vol. 60, No. 3 (Summer 1991), pp.
411-426; Sung Joon Jang and Byron R. Johnson, "Neighborhood
Disorder, Individual Religiosity, and Adolescent Use of Illicit
Drugs: A Test of Multilevel Hypotheses," Criminology, Vol.
39, No. 1 (February 2001), pp. 109-144; and Byron R. Johnson and
David B. Larson, "Religion: The Forgotten Factor in Cutting Youth
Crime and Saving At-Risk Urban Youth," Manhattan Institute for
Policy Research, Center for Civic Innovation Jeremiah Project
Report No. 2, 1998, at
(December 6, 2006).
[3] For a review of the evidence on this
topic, see Michael Novak, On Two Wings: Humble Faith and Common
Sense at the American Founding (San Francisco: Encounter Books,
2001).
[4] James D. Richardson, Compilation of
Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 1789-1897 (Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1907), Vol. 1, p. 213.
[5] See Linda Waite and Maggie Gallagher,
The Case for Marriage: Why Married People Are Happier,
Healthier, and Better Off Financially (New York: Doubleday,
2000); David Popenoe, Life Without Father (New York: Free
Press, 1960); and David Blankenhorn, Fatherless America (New
York: Basic Books, 1995).
[6] Andrew J. Weaver, Judith A. Samford,
Virginia J. Morgan, David B. Larson, Harold G. Koenig, and Kevin J.
Flannelly,"A Systematic Review of Research on Religion in Six
Primary Marriage and Family Journals: 1995-1999," American
Journal of Family Therapy, Vol. 30, No. 4 (July 2002), pp.
293-309.
[7] Christopher G. Ellison and Kristin L.
Anderson, "Religious Involvement and Domestic Violence Among U.S.
Couples," Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 40,
Issue 2 (June 2001), pp. 269-286.
[8] Linda C. Robinson, "Marital Strengths in
Enduring Marriages," Family Relations, Vol. 42, No. 1
(1993), pp. 38-45.
[9] Jane Reardon-Anderson, Matthew Stagner,
Jennifer Ehrle Macomber, and Julie Murray, "Systematic Review of
the Impact of Marriage and Relationship Programs," Urban Institute,
February 11, 2005, at
(December 6, 2006).
[10] Karen Price Carver, "Female Employment
and First Union Dissolution in Puerto Rico," Journal of Marriage
and Family, Vol. 55, No. 3 (1993), pp. 686-698.
[11] Vaughn R. A. CallandTim B. Heaton,
"Religious Influence on Marital Stability," Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 36, No. 3 (September 1997),
pp. 382-392.
[12] Chris Knoester and Alan Booth,
"Barriers to Divorce: When Are They Effective? When Are They
Not?"Journal of Family Issues, Vol. 27, No. 1 (January
2000), pp. 78-99.
[13] David B. Larson, Susan S. Larson, and
John Gartner, "Families, Relationships and Health," in Danny
Wedding, ed., Behavior and Medicine (St. Louis: Mosby Year
Book, Inc., 1990), pp. 135-147.
[14] Lee G. Burchinal, "Marital Satisfaction
and Religious Behavior," American Sociological Review, Vol.
22, No. 3 (June 1957), pp. 306-310.
[15] Lisa D. Pearce and Dana L. Haynie,
"Intergenerational Religious Dynamics and Adolescent Delinquency,"
Social Forces, Vol. 82, No. 4 (June 2004), pp.
1553-1572.
[16] Christopher G. Ellison, John P.
Bartkowski, and Kristin L. Anderson, "Are There Religious
Variations in Domestic Violence?" Journal of Family Issues,
Vol. 20, No. 1 (January 1999), pp. 87-113.
[17] Kristen Taylor
Curtis and Christopher G. Ellison, "Religious Heterogamy and
Marital Conflict: Findings from the National Survey of Families and
Households," Journal of Family Issues, Vol. 23, No. 4 (May
2002), pp. 551-576.
[18] Evelyn L. Lehrer and Carmel U.
Chiswick, "Religion as a Determinant of Marital
Stability,"Demography, Vol. 30, No. 3 (August1993), pp.
385-404.
[19] Howard Wineberg, "Marital
Reconciliation in the United States: Which Couples Are Successful?"
Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 56, No.1 (February
1994), pp. 80-88.
[20] Michael Hout, "Why More Americans Have
No Religious Preference: Politics and Generations," American
Sociological Review, Vol. 67, No. 2 (April 2002), pp.
165-190.
[21] Timothy T. Clydesdale, "Family
Behaviors Among Early U.S. Baby Boomers: Exploring the Effects of
Religion and Income Change, 1965-1982," Social Forces, Vol.
76, No. 2 (December 1997), pp. 605-635.
[22] Paul R. Amato, David R. Johnson, Alan
Booth, and Stacy J. Rogers, "Continuity and Change in Marital
Quality Between 1980 and 2000," Journal of Marriage and
Family, Vol. 65, No.1 (February 2003), pp. 1-22.
[23] W. Bradford Wilcox, Soft
Patriarchs, New Men: How Christianity Shapes Fathers and
Husbands (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004), p.
186.
[24]Howard M. Bahr and Bruce A. Chadwick,
"Religion and Family in Middleton, USA,"Journal of Marriage and
Family, Vol. 47 (May 1985), pp. 407-414.
[25] Carol Tavris and Susan Sadd, The
Redbook Report on Female Sexuality (New York: Delacorte Press,
1977).
[26] Larry L. Bumpass, James A. Sweet, and
Andrew Cherlin, "The Role of Cohabitation in Declining Rates of
Marriage," University of Wisconsin, Center for Demography and
Ecology National Survey of Families and Households Working
Paper No. 5, 1989, pp. 913-927.
[27] Paul R. Amato, "Explaining the
Intergenerational Transmission of Divorce," Journal of Marriage
and Family, Vol. 58, No. 3 (August 1996), pp. 628-640.
[28] Kazuo Yamaguchi, "Dynamic Relationships
Between Premarital Cohabitation and Illicit Drug Use: An
Event-History Analysis of Role Selection and Role Socialization,"
American Sociological Review, Vol. 50, No. 4 (August 1985),
pp. 530-546.
[29] Arland Thornton, W. G. Axinn, and D. H.
Hill, "Reciprocal Effects of Religiosity, Cohabitation, and
Marriage," American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 98, No. 3
(November 1992), pp. 628-651.
[31] Lisa D. Pearce and William G. Axinn,
"The Impact of Family Religious Life on the Quality of Mother-Child
Relations," American Sociological Review, Vol. 63, No. 6
(December 1998), pp. 810-828.
[32] W.
Bradford Wilcox, "Religion, Convention, and Paternal Involvement,"
Journalof
Marriage and Family,
Vol. 64, No. 3 (August 2002), pp. 780-792.
[33] William S. Aquilino, "Two Views of One
Relationship: Comparing Parents' and Young Adult Children's Reports
of the Quality of Intergenerational Relations," Journal of
Marriage and Family, Vol. 61, No. 4 (November 1999), pp.
858-870.
[34] Pearce and Haynie, "Intergenerational
Religious Dynamics and Adolescent Delinquency."
[35] Pearce and Axinn, "The Impact of Family
Religious Life on the Quality of Mother-Child Relations."
[39] Wilcox, "Religion, Convention, and
Paternal Involvement."
[40] Ellison et al., "Are There
Religious Variations in Domestic Violence?"
[41] Ellison and Anderson,"Religious
Involvement and Domestic Violence Among U.S. Couples."
[42] Wilcox, Soft Patriarchs, p.
182.
[43] Lisa D. Wade, "Relationship Dissolution
as a Life Stage Transition: Effects on Sexual Attitudes and
Behaviors," Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 64, No. 4
(November 2002), pp. 898-914.
[44] Sharon Scales Rostosky, Mark D.
Regnerus, and Margaret Laurie Comer Wright, "Coital Debut: The Role
of Religiosity and Sex Attitudes in the Add Health Survey,"
Journal of Sex Research, Vol.40, No. 4 (November 2003), pp.
358-367.
[45] Wilcox, Soft
Patriarchs, p. 81.
[46] Gerbert Kraaykamp, "Trends and
Countertrends in Sexual Permissiveness: Three Decades of Attitude
Change in the Netherlands: 1965-1995," Journal of Marriage and
Family, Vol. 64, No. 1 (February 2002), pp. 225-239.
[47] Arland Thornton, "Religious
Participation and Adolescent Sexual Behavior and Attitudes,"
Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 51, No. 3 (August
1989), pp. 641-653.
[48] In this study, "religiosity" scores
were measured on a scale that ranged from 3 to 12 and represented
an average of an individual's scores with regard to three different
variables: attendance at religious services, participation in
religious youth activities, and self-rated importance of
religion.
[49] Rostosky et al., "Coital
Debut."
[50] Lynn Blinn-Pike, "Why Abstinent
Adolescents Report They Have Not Had Sex: Understanding Sexually
Resilient Youth," Family Relations, Vol. 48, No. 3 (July
1999), pp. 295-301.
[51] John O. G. Billy, "Contextual Effects
on the Sexual Behavior of Adolescent Women," Journal of Marriage
and Family, Vol. 56, No. 2 (May 1994), pp. 387-404.
[52] Byron R. Johnson, Ralph Brett Tompkins,
and Derek Webb, "Objective Hope-Assessing the Effectiveness of
Faith-Based Organizations: A Systematic Review of the Literature,"
Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Center for Research on
Religion and Urban Civil Society, 2002, at
(June 30, 2005).
[53] Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, "Births:
Preliminary Data for 2005," reviewed November 21, 2006, at
(December 13, 2006).
[54] Maureen
Waller, "High Hopes: Unmarried Parents' Expectations About
Marriage," Children and Youth Services Review,Vol. 23, No. 6
(December 2001), pp. 457-484.
[55] Allan F. Abrahamse, Beyond
Stereotypes: Who Becomes a Single Teenage Mother? (Santa
Monica, Calif.: Rand Corporation, 1988), pp. 37-50.
[56] Michael J. Donahue, "Aggregate
Religiousness and Teenage Fertility Revisited: Reanalyses of Data
from the Guttmacher Institute," presented at the Annual Meeting of
the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion, Chicago, October
30, 1988.
[57] Harold G. Koenig, Linda K. George,
Harvey J. Cohen, Judith C. Hays, David B. Larson, and Dan G.
Blazer, "The Relationship Between Religious Activities and
Cigarette Smoking in Older Adults," Journals of Gerontology:
Medical Sciences, Vol. 53A, Issue 6 (November 1998), pp.
M426-M434.
[58] Feroz
Ahmed, Diane R. Brown, Lawrence E. Gary, and Frough Saadatmand,
"Religious Predictors of Cigarette Smoking: Findings for African
American Women of Childbearing Age," Behavioral Medicine,
Vol. 20, No. 1 (Spring 1994), pp. 34-43.
[59] John Gartner, David B. Larson, and
George Allen, "Religious Commitment and Mental Health: A Review of
the Empirical Literature," Journal of Psychology and
Theology, Vol. 19, Issue 1 (Spring 1991), pp. 6-25.
[60] Deborah Hasin, Jean Endicott, and
CollinsLewis, "Alcohol and Drug Abuse in Patients with Affective
Syndrome," Comprehensive Psychiatry, Vol. 26,Issue
3(May-June 1985), pp. 283-295.
[61] Achaempong Y. Amoeateng and Stephen J.
Bahr, "Religion, Family, and Drug Abuse," Sociological
Perspectives, Vol. 29 (1986), pp. 53-73, and John K. Cochran,
Leonard Beghley, and E. Wilbur Block, "Religiosity and Alcohol
Behavior: An Exploration of Reference Group Therapy,"
Sociological Forum, Vol. 3, No. 2 (Spring 1988), pp.
256-276.
[62] Marvin D. Free, Jr., "Religiosity,
Religious Conservatism, Bonds to School, and Juvenile Delinquency
Among Three Categories of Drug Users," Deviant Behavior,
Vol. 15, No. 2 (1994), pp. 151-170.
[63] David A. Brizer, "Religiosity and Drug
Abuse Among Psychiatric Inpatients," American Journal of Drug
and Alcohol Abuse, Vol. 19, No. 3 (September 1993), pp.
337-345.
[64] Stephanie
Carroll, "Spirituality and Purpose in Life in Alcoholism Recovery,"
Journal of Studies on Alcohol, Vol. 54, No. 3 (May 1993),
pp. 297-301.
[65] Vangie
A. Foshee and Bryan R. Hollinger, "Maternal Religiosity, Adolescent
Social Bonding, and Adolescent Alcohol Use," Journal of Early
Adolescence, Vol. 16, No. 4 (November 1996), pp. 451-468.
[66] Barbara R. Lorch
and Robert H. Hughes, "Religion and Youth Substance Use,"
Journal of Religion and Health, Vol. 24, No. 3(September
1985), pp. 197-208.
[67] Johnson et al., "Objective
Hope."
[68] Byron R.
Johnson, "A Better Kind of High: How Religious Commitment Reduces
Drug Use Among Poor Urban Teens," Manhattan Institute for Policy
Research, Center for Research on Religion and Urban Civil Society
Report No. 2000-2, at
(December 6, 2006).
[69] Edward M. Adlaf, "Drug Use and
Religious Affiliation: Feelings and Behavior," British Journal
of Addiction,Vol. 80, No. 2 (June 1985), pp. 163-171.
[70] Roger D. Thompson, "Teen Challenge of
Chattanooga, Tennessee: Survey of Alumni," University of Tennessee
at Chattanooga, 1994.
[71] Aaron T. Bicknese, "The Teen Challenge
Drug Treatment Program in Comparative Perspective," doctoral
dissertation, Northwestern University, 1999.
[72] A recent review of the sociological
literature on drug treatment and rehabilitation by Byron Johnson,
now at Baylor University's Department of Sociology and
Anthropology, gives cause for both optimism and caution: "Our
review of the literature on faith-based [interventions] reveals two
very basic facts. First, what we do know about their effectiveness
is positive and encouraging. Faith-based organizations appear to
have advantages over comparable secular institutions in helping
individuals overcome difficult circumstances (e.g., imprisonment
and drug abuse). Second, although this literature is positive, it
is also limited." Johnson et al., "Objective Hope."
[73] Johnson et al.,"Objective
Hope."
[76] Ellison et al., "Are There
Religious Variations in Domestic Violence?" andJ. M. Mosher and P.
J. Handal, "The Relationship Between Religion and Psychological
Distress in Adolescents," Journal of Psychology and
Theology, Vol. 25, Issue 4 (Winter 1997), pp. 449-457.
[77] Christopher G. Ellison, Jason D.
Boardman, David R. Williams, and James S. Jackson, "Religious Involvement, Stress, and
Mental Health: Findings from the 1995 Detroit Area Study,"
Social Forces, Vol. 80, Issue 1
(September 2001), pp. 215-249.
[78] Sung Joon Jang and Byron R. Johnson,
"Explaining Religious Effects on Distress Among African Americans,"
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 43, No. 2
(June 2004), pp. 239-260.
[79] Johnson et al.,"Objective
Hope."
[80] Neal Krause, Christopher G. Ellison,
Benjamin A. Shaw, John P. Marcum, and Jason D. Boardman,
"Church-Based Social Support and Religious Coping," Journal for
the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 40, No. 4 (December
2001), pp. 637-656.
[81] Ellisonet al.,"
Religious
Involvement, Stress, and Mental Health."
[82] C. A. Markstrom, "Religious Involvement
and Adolescent Psychosocial Development," Journal of
Adolescence, Vol. 22, No. 2 (April 1999), pp. 205-221.
[83] Ellison et al., "Are There
Religious Variations in Domestic Violence?"
[84] Johnson et al.,"Objective
Hope."
[85] Christopher G. Ellison, "Race,
Religious Involvement, and Depressive Symptomatology in a
Southeastern U.S. Community," Social Science and Medicine,
Vol. 40, No. 11 (June 1995), pp. 1561-1572.
[86] Loyd S. Wright, Christopher J. Frost,
and Stephen J. Wisecarver, "Church Attendance, Meaningfulness of
Religion, and Depressive Symptomatology Among Adolescents,"
Journal of Youth and Adolesence, Vol. 22, No. 5 (October
1993), pp. 559-568.
[87] Frank Tovato, "Domestic/Religious
Individualism and Youth Suicide in Canada," Family
Perspective, Vol. 24, No. 1 (1990), pp. 69-81.
[88] K. Harker, "Immigration Generation,
Assimilation, and Adolescent Psychological Well-Being," Social
Forces, Vol. 79, No. 3 (March 2001), pp. 969-1004.
[89] Johnson et al.,"Objective
Hope."
[90]Mark D. Regnerus, "Religion and Positive
Adolescent Outcomes: A Review of Research and Theory," Review of
Religious Research, Vol. 44, No. 4 (June 2003), pp.
394-413.
[91]Robert A. Hummer, Richard G. Rogers, Charles
B. Nam, and Christopher G. Ellison, "Religious Involvement and U.S.
Adult Mortality," Demography, Vol. 36, No. 2 (May 1999), pp.
273-285.
[92] Robert A. Hummer, Christopher G.
Ellison, Richard G. Rogers, Benjamin E. Moulton, and Ron R.
Romero,"Religious Involvement and Adult Mortality in the United
States: Review and Perspective," Southern Medical Journal,
Vol. 97, No. 12 (December 2004), pp. 1223-1230.
[93] Jeffrey S. Levin and Preston L.
Schiller, "Is There a Religious Factor in Health?" Journal of
Religion and Health, Vol. 26, No. 1 (March 1987), pp. 9-35.
[94] George W. Comstock and Kay B. Patridge,
"Church Attendance and Health," Journal of Chronic Diseases,
Vol. 25, No. 12 (December 1972), pp. 665-672.
[95] Hummer et al., "Religious
Involvement and U.S. Adult Mortality."
[96] Ellison et al., "Are There
Religious Variations in Domestic Violence?"
[97] Mark D. Regnerus, "Making the Grade:
The Influence of Religion upon the Academic Performance of Youth in
Disadvantaged Communities," University of Pennsylvania, Center for
Research on Religion and Urban Civil Society Report No.3,
2001.
[98] Mark D. Regnerus, "Shaping Schooling
Success: Religious Socialization and Educational Outcomes in
Metropolitan Public Schools," Journal for the Scientific Study
of Religion, Vol. 39, Issue 3 (September 2000), pp.
363-370.
[99] Chandra Muller and Christopher G.
Ellison, "Religious Involvement, Social Capital, and Adolescents'
Academic Progress: Evidence from the National Education
Longitudinal Study of 1988," Sociological Focus, Vol. 34,
No. 2 (May 2001), pp. 155-183.
[100] See Derek Neal, "What Have We Learned
About the Benefits of Private Schooling?" Federal Reserve Bank of
New York Economic Policy Review, Vol. 4, No. 1 (March 1998),
pp. 79-86.
[101] Muller and Ellison, "Religious
Involvement, Social Capital, and Adolescents' Academic
Progress."
[102] Richard B. Freeman, "Who Escapes? The
Relation of Churchgoing and Other Background Factors to the
Socioeconomic Performance of Black Male Youths from Inner-City
Tracts," National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper
No. 1656, June 1985.
[103] Douglas M. Sloane and Raymond H.
Potvin, "Religion and Delinquency: Cutting Through the Maze,"
Social Forces, Vol. 65, No. 1 (September 1986), pp.
87-105.
[104]Regnerus, "Making the Grade."
[105] Brown and Gary, "Religious
Socialization and Educational Attainment Among African
Americans."
[106] Regnerus, "Shaping Schooling
Success."
[107] Arthur C. Brooks, "Compassion,
Religion, and Politics," Public Interest, September 22,
2004, pp. 57-66.
[108] Mark D. Regnerus, Christian Smith,
and David Sikkink, "Who Gives to the Poor? The Influence of
Religious Tradition and Political Location on the Personal
Generosity of Americans Toward the Poor," Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 37, No. 3 (September 1998),
pp. 481-493.
[109]Brooks, "Compassion, Religion, and
Politics."
[110]Ram A. Cnaan, "The Philadelphia Story:
Preliminary Findings from the Philadelphia Census," Hartford
Institute for Religious Research, at
(December 7, 2006), and Ram A. Cnaan and Stephanie C. Boddie,
"Philadelphia Census of Congregations and Their Involvement in
Social Service Delivery," Social Service Review, Vol. 75,
No. 4 (December 2001), pp. 559-589.
[111]Patrick F. Fagan, "The Real Root Causes of
Violent Crime: The Breakdown of Marriage, Family, and Community,"
Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 1026, March 17, 1995,
at
[112] Hummer et al., "Religious
Involvement and Adult Mortality in the United States," pp.
1224-1225.
[113] David Lester, "Religiosity and
Personal Violence: A Regional Analysis of Suicide and Homicide
Rates," The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 127, No. 6
(December 1987), pp. 685-686.
[114] Ellison et al., "Are There
Religious Variations in Domestic Violence?"
[115]Byron R. Johnson, David B. Larson, Spencer
De Li, and Sung Joon Jang, "Escaping from the Crime of Inner
Cities: Church Attendance and Religious Salience Among
Disadvantaged Youth," Justice Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 2
(June 2000), pp. 377-39.
[116]Freeman, "Who Escapes?"
[117] Johnson and Larson, "Religion," and
Byron R. Johnson, "Does Adolescent Religious Commitment Matter? A
Reexamination of the Effects of Religiosity on Delinquency,"
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 38, No. 1
(February 2001), pp. 22-43.
[118] Increased religious practice
coincides with decreases of 27 percent for marijuana use and 33
percent for hard drugs. Jang and Johnson, "Neighborhood Disorder,
Individual Religiosity, and Adolescent Use of Illicit Drugs."
[119] Johnson and Larson, "Religion."
[120] Johnson, "A Better Kind of High."
[121] Pearce and Haynie, "Intergenerational
Religious Dynamics and Adolescent Delinquency."
[123] Johnson et al.,"Objective
Hope."
[124] For original research results and a
review of related literature, see Marlena Studer and Arland
Thornton, "Adolescent Religiosity and Contraceptive Usage,"
Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 49, No. 1 (February
1987), pp. 117-128, and Jennifer S. Manlove, Elizabeth Terry Humen,
Erum Ikramullah, and Kristin A. Moore, "The Role of Parent
Religiosity in Teen's Transition to Sex and Contraception,"
Journal of Adolescent Health, Vol. 39, Issue 4 (October
2006), pp. 578-587.
[125] See Patrick Fagan, Kirk A. Johnson,
and Jonathan Butcher, "A Portrait of Family and Religion in
America: Key Outcomes for the Common Good," The Heritage
Foundation, 2006, p. 33, Chart 26, and p. 34, Chart 27, at .
[126] David B. Larson and Susan S. Larson,
The Forgotten Factor in Physical and Mental Health: What Does
the Research Show? (Rockville, Md.: National Institute for
Healthcare Research, 1994), p. 87.
[127] Ken F. Wiebe and J. Roland Fleck,
"Personality Correlates of Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Non-Religious
Orientations, Journal of Psychology, Vol. 105, No. 2 (July
1980), pp. 111-117.
[128] Richard D. Kahoe,"Personality and
Achievement Correlates on Intrinsic and Extrinsic Religious
Orientations," Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 29, No. 6 (June 1974), pp. 812-818.
[129] Allen E. Bergin, Kevin S. Masters,
and P. Scott Richards, "Religiousness and Mental Health
Reconsidered: A Study of an Intrinsically Religious Sample,"
Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 34, Issue 2 (April
1987), pp. 197-204; Mark Baker and Richard Gorsuch, "Trait Anxiety
and Intrinsic-Extrinsic Religiousness," Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 21, No. 2 (June 1982), pp.
119-122; Gordon W. Allport and J. Michael Ross, "Personal Religious
Orientation and Prejudice," Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 5, No. 4 (April 1967), pp. 432-443.
[130] Bergin et al., "Religiousness
and Mental Health Reconsidered."
[131] Ann M. Downey, "Relationships of
Religiosity to Death Anxiety of Middle-Aged Males,"
Psychological Reports, Vol. 54, No. 3 (June 1984), pp.
811-822.
[132] Gordon W. Allport, The Person in
Psychology: Selected Essays (Boston: Beacon Press, 1968), p.
150.
[133] Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306
(1952).
[134] Johnson et al.,"Objective
Hope."
[135] Byron R. Johnson, "Religious Programs
and Recidivism Among Former Inmates in Prison Fellowship Programs:
A Long-Term Follow-Up Study," Justice Quarterly, Vol. 21,
No. 2 (June 2004), pp. 329-354.
[136] Allen E. Bergin, "Values and
Religious Issues in Psychotherapy and Mental Health," The
American Psychologist, Vol. 46, No. 4 (April 1991), pp.
394-403.