2005-04-29-US-religion

By Ira Sharkansky

One of the mysteries of political science concerns the status of religion in American politics. Of all the economically advanced democracies, the US is most affected by religion. Europeans are tired of the issues concerned with faith. There are more tourists in the churches than people who come to pray. Israelis put up with several religious parties in the Knesset, but they compete for attention with parties that are anti-religious. Abortion and evolution are not on the agenda. Neither is prayer in schools that are not explicitly religious. Cyprus is a short flight for Israelis who do not want a religious wedding. George Bush is several mega points beyond Ariel Sharon, Tony Blair, Jacques Chirac, and Gerhard Schroeder in the frequency and intensity of expressing sentiments that are explicitly religious .

Why the American preoccupation with religion, and what politicians see as what the Almighty wants, demands, or forbids?

There are several explanations, none of them none of them entirely convincing. One has to do with the religious origin of early immigrants (Pilgrims, Puritans, Roger Williams). Another with the lack of established churches, which—along with immigration from many places— produces competition between churches for members, often via colorful evangelical movements. There is a meshing of Protestant emphasis on individual paths to salvation, and the free-enterprise, minimal welfare state that is distinctively American.

Remember that Prohibition was an expression of Protestant power, associated with anti-Catholicism (all those Irish drinking in all those saloons). The most recent revival of political religiosity reflects, I think, a reaction to Supreme Court activism in abortion and school prayer. The issue of homosexual and lesbian rights, including marriage, will help to keep it alive. Opposition to evolution is the most bizarre feature of a society that also features Silicon Valley and the National Institutes of Health.

Most of my American friends are Democrats, and several of them have written or forwarded commentaries seeking a way beyond a faith-driven regime. Several are fixated on the idea of a party for all the people. This means the liberal part of the Roosevelt coalition, plus more recent ethnics, with explicit support for the environment, gun control, diverse sexual orientation, disabilities, freedom of choice, and aid for the arts. I can identify with all of those goals, but my political sense tells me that it is a recipe for a Jeb Bush White House in 2009.

Another curiosity is all those Americans who vote according to their view of the Almighty, but do not invest that way to help God's party. Wall Street is slowly descending into the tank. It has sunk nine percent since its high of this year. No commentators whom I notice see an early rebound. Perhaps religious Americans have less money than the average individual investor; and they may be underrepresented in the managements of mutual funds and other institutions that are heavy movers in the stock market. Or maybe the religious are more willing to risk a vote than a dollar for religious principles. Remember the economy, stupid.

Bush's popularity is sinking along with the market. The Democrats have a chance, but their candidate cannot be too explicit in opposing any of the things that excite the religious. Silence is not a way to political victory. Life is tough for Americans who yearn for a European political agenda.

Meanwhile, the Israeli stock market index is up about 6 percent since January, and has more than doubled since early 2003. Security is important to local investors and those overseas who consider putting their money here. As the intifada has weakened, the economy has strengthened. If any of you have spare shekels, there are lots of brokers willing to accept them.

Sharkansky is a member of the political science department at Hebrew University in Jerusalem