DOCSLIB.ORG

Religious Advocates: a Force in US Politics? BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE FELLOWS REPORT REPORT FELLOWS BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE Table of Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Religious Advocates: a Force in US Politics? BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE FELLOWS REPORT REPORT FELLOWS BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE Table of Contents BERKLEY CENTER for RELIGION, PEACE & WORLD AFFAIRS GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY 2007–2008 | 2007 Undergraduate Fellows Report Religious Advocates: A Force in US Politics? BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE FELLOWS REPORT REPORT FELLOWS BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE Table of Contents About this Report . 1 About the Berkley Center Acknowledgements Introduction . 3. Important Advocacy Issues I . Insider/Outsider Advocacy Strategies . 4 Insider Advocacy Grassroots Advocacy Determining the Issues II . Partisanship . 7. Elections Membership and Party Ties Policy, Not Party III . Coalitions . 10. Bridging the Religious-Secular Divide Building Bridges within the Religious Community IV . Religious Language . 14 Faith Talk: The Language of Religious Advocates The Religious Edge: Effectiveness of Religious Advocates Conclusion . 18 Appendix A: Survey Questions . 21 Appendix B: List of Organizations Interviewed and Surveyed . 22 Appendix C: Other issues listed by religious advocacy groups . 23 2007 Undergraduate Fellows Biographies . 24. Copyright 2007, Georgetown University. About this report Acknowledgements The Berkley Center’s 2007 Undergraduate Fellows Faculty Advisor Program gave a select group of ten Georgetown under- Professor Clyde Wilcox 2007–2008 graduate students the resources to study the role of | Department of Government religious advocacy groups in United States politics. Under the direction of Professor Clyde Wilcox of the Program Coordinator Department of Government, the Fellows spent the 2007 academic year defining their research agenda, Melody Fox Ahmed studying the key issues as a group, and learning from experts in seminars with speakers such as a prominent Project Leaders religious advocate and a leading journalist of religion Jenna Cossman and politics. They then reached out to leaders of a vari- Todd Wintner ety of religious advocacy groups in Washington, D.C., to conduct in-person interviews and an online survey. Authors Driven by awareness of the importance of religion to United States policies, especially as it relates to the 2008 Jenna Cossman U.S. presidential election, the Fellows sought to under- Catherine Currie stand the influence of religious advocacy on national Nadia Khan politics today. They hope their findings will serve as a useful tool to better understand this important issue. Camille Kolstad Megan O’Neill This is the second annual Berkley Center Undergraduate Fellows report. In 2006, the Fellows studied the role of Eric Nowicki religious and secular organizations in development Jeff Pan policy and released a report with their findings entitled Nicolas Sementelli Secular & Religious Approaches to Global Development: A Common Ground? Eric Wind Todd Wintner For more information, visit the website at http://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE FELLOWS REPORT REPORT FELLOWS BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE The Berkley CenTer for religion, PeaCe, and World affairs The Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs, created within the Office of the President in March 2006, is part of a university-wide effort to build knowledge about religion’s role in world affairs and promote interreligious understanding in the service of peace. Through research, teaching, and outreach activities, the Center explores the intersection of religion with four global challenges: diplomacy and trans- national relations, democracy and human rights, global development, and interreligious dialogue. Thomas Banchoff, Associate Professor in the Department of Government and the School of Foreign Service, is the Center’s first director. 1 Religious Advocates: A Force in US Politics? Introduction Since the 2004 U.S. presidential election, much atten- 2007–2008 tion and scrutiny has been given to religious advocacy | groups and the perceived rise in strength of the “religious lobby.” Many commentators have claimed that these groups have an undue effect on American politics, and a myriad of articles and books have been written on the subject. With approximately a year left until the 2008 U.S. presidential election, the spotlight is once again focused on religious advocacy groups as candidates vie for the support and votes of the American people. Relatively little is known about the composition and influence of religious advocacy groups in the U.S. their goals by focusing on the strategies of insider versus Between February and November 2007, the Berkley outsider advocacy, the partisanship ties of advocacy Center Undergraduate Fellows set out to provide some groups, the coalitions shaping the advocacy environ- definition to this often misunderstood community. ment, and the religious language these groups and Specifically, our project seeks to better understand how coalitions employ in advocating for specific issues. religious advocates conduct their affairs and achieve Ultimately, the goal of evaluating the effectiveness of religious affiliaTions of The 110Th Congress African Methodist Episcopal Jewish Anglican Mormon Assembly of God Reorganized Latter-Day Saints Baptist Lutheran Buddhist Methodist Christian Muslim Christian Reformed Nazarene REPORT FELLOWS BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE Christain Scientists Presbyterian Church of Christ Protestant Congregationalists Baptist Quaker Disciples of Christ Roman Catholic Eastern Orthodox Seventh-Day Adventist Episcopalian Unitarian Evangelical United Church of Christ Evangelical Lutheran Unaffiliated Evangelical Methodist 3 religious advocacy groups on U.S. policy provided the Important Advocacy Issues framework for this study. The survey results show a wide range of interests and issues addressed by religious advocacy groups over the The methodology used for the project consisted of past year. Notably, issues frequently associated with in-person interviews of religious advocates as well as religious advocacy in the media, such as abortion and an online survey sent out electronically to numerous family issues, were equally accompanied by a number religious advocacy organizations. The surveyed groups of other concerns such as human rights, justice and include some that are explicitly religious in their plat- the environment. The following graph illustrates the form as well as others that do not specifically mention diversity of issues taken up by religious advocacy orga- religion, but advocate for what could be considered nizations. Other less frequent responses are listed in religious issues based on the group’s target constituency, Appendix B. the intentionality of their constituents, their cause, and their rhetoric. The survey included both qualitative I. Insider/Outsider Advocacy and quantitative questions, and groups who responded Strategies to the electronic version of the survey were allowed to answer anonymously. See Appendix A for a list of ques- Religious advocacy groups, like other interest groups, tions used in the survey and Appendix B for a list of the can choose among a variety of strategies and tactics. organizations interviewed and surveyed. However, given that the majority of religious advocacy organizations are registered under 501(c)(3) tax-exempt The United States Congress is the avenue by which the status, they are not “lobbies” in the legal sense and vast majority of religious advocacy groups attempt to therefore are limited to “educating” policy makers for influence public policy. Congress itself is a model of the sake of “public interest.” In return, 501(c)(3) status religious pluralism as no individual religious denomina- offers tax-exemption for both the organization and the GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY GEORGETOWN | tion finds majority representation. The chart on the donations it receives. previous page represents the declared faith of the 535 members of Congress. imPorTanT advoCaCy issues In the past year, with which issues has your organization worked? 30 BERKLEY CENTER 25 20 15 10 5 0 e s t s n e ir ce rty Stat fa atio nmen Peac ove Justi P s Issues Abortion ch/ mily Issue viro ign Af re Immigr Chur Fa En men’ Fo Human Rights Wo 4 Insider Advocacy There is a fine line between the strategies used by lobbying organizations on Capitol Hill and the “insider advocacy” tactics employed by religious advocacy groups. Most of these strategies directly overlap, including meetings, phone calls, and other forms of face-to-face interaction between advocates and members of government. Such meetings are invaluable opportunities for members of the advocacy community to educate policymakers about their organizations’ issues of concern and build relationships with politicians who can serve as advo- cates for their causes. For example, it was only through her discussion with Nancy Pelosi on the topic of the 2007–2008 2007 U.S. Farm Bill that Monica Mills, Director of | Government Relations at Bread for the World, had the opportunity to effectively express her moral opposition to certain aspects of the legislation. Interestingly, 97% of the organizations surveyed reported meeting with government officials ten or more times during the past year. Only one organization, the Buddhist Peace Fellowship, reported no engagement Washington National Cathedral in “insider advocacy” activities. The advocacy groups surveyed reported approaching policymakers across the There is a fine line between the strategies three branches of government, not only meeting with used by lobbying organizations on the high-level officials but their staff as well. Hill and the “insider advocacy” tactics employed by religious advocacy groups. Some well-connected religious advocates exert enough political
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Spreading the Gospel of Climate Change: an Evangelical Battleground
    NEW POLITICAL REFORM NEW MODELS OF AMERICA PROGRAM POLICY CHANGE LYDIA BEAN AND STEVE TELES SPREADING THE GOSPEL OF CLIMATE CHANGE: AN EVANGELICAL BATTLEGROUND PART OF NEW AMERICA’S STRANGE BEDFELLOWS SERIES NOVEMBER 2015 #STRANGEBEDFELLOWS About the Authors About New Models of Policy Change Lydia Bean is author of The Politics New Models of Policy Change starts from the observation of Evangelical Identity (Princeton UP that the traditional model of foundation-funded, 2014). She is Executive Director of Faith think-tank driven policy change -- ideas emerge from in Texas, and Senior Consultant to the disinterested “experts” and partisan elites compromise PICO National Network. for the good of the nation -- is failing. Partisan polarization, technological empowerment of citizens, and heightened suspicions of institutions have all taken their toll. Steven Teles is an associate professor of political science at Johns Hopkins But amid much stagnation, interesting policy change University and a fellow at New America. is still happening. The paths taken on issues from sentencing reform to changes in Pentagon spending to resistance to government surveillance share a common thread: they were all a result of transpartisan cooperation. About New America By transpartisan, we mean an approach to advocacy in which, rather than emerging from political elites at the New America is dedicated to the renewal of American center, new policy ideas emerge from unlikely corners of politics, prosperity, and purpose in the Digital Age. We the right or left and find allies on the other side, who may carry out our mission as a nonprofit civic enterprise: an come to the same idea from a very different worldview.
    [Show full text]
  • Unrisd United Nations Research Institute for Social Development
    UNRISD UNITED NATIONS RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT Religion, Politics and Gender Equality Country Report: USA Janet R. Jakobsen, Elizabeth Bernstein Department of Women’s Studies, Barnard College, Columbia University, New York, USA Final Research Report prepared for the project Religion, Politics and Gender Equality September 2009 The United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) is an autonomous agency engaging in multidisciplinary research on the social dimensions of contemporary devel- opment issues. Its work is guided by the conviction that, for effective development policies to be formulated, an understanding of the social and political context is crucial. The Institute attempts to provide governments, development agencies, grassroots organizations and scholars with a better understanding of how development policies and processes of economic, social and envi- ronmental change affect different social groups. Working through an extensive network of na- tional research centres, UNRISD aims to promote original research and strengthen research capacity in developing countries. UNRISD, Palais des Nations, 1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland phone 41 (0)22 9173020; fax 41 (0)22 9170650; [email protected], www.unrisd.org The Heinrich Böll Foundation is a Green Think Tank that is part of an International Policy Net- work promoting ecology, democracy, and human rights worldwide. It is part of the Green politi- cal movement that has developed worldwide as a response to the traditional politics of social- ism, liberalism, and conservatism. Its main tenets are ecology and sustainability, democracy and human rights, self-determination and justice. It promotes gender democracy, meaning so- cial emancipation and equal rights for women and men, equal rights for cultural and ethnic mi- norities, societal and political participation of immigrants, non-violence and proactive peace poli- cies.
    [Show full text]
  • ARTICLES Public Schools Are Not Religion Free Zones J. Brent Walker ...20 BOOK REVIEWS the Early Church On
    Christian Ethics Today A Journal of Christian Ethics Volume 22, Number 1 Aggregate Issue 92 Winter 2014 “The voice of one crying out in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord’” Isaiah 40:3; John 1:23 ARTICLES Pope Francis and The Joy of The Gospel Walter B. Shurden ............................. 2 Evangelicals and Climate Change Charles Redfern ................................................. 5 Black Baptists and Same Sex Marriage Aaron Douglas Weaver ..................... 9 The Re-assassination of MLK Wendell Griffin .............................................................14 Sexual Predators Beware! Rita Hoyt Jenkins ................................................................17 Public Schools are not Religion Free Zones J. Brent Walker .........................20 Marriage and Contraception Nathan C. Walker .......................................................21 A “Duck Call” For All J. Randall O’Brien ..............................................................................22 God as Sister, God and Sister Martin E. Marty ...........................................................23 BOOK REVIEWS The Early Church on Killing, by Ron Sider Reviewed by Tony Campolo ...24 By the Rivers of Water, by Erskine Clarke Reviewed by Darold Morgan ...25 VERSE Bringing Transcendence in Play James A. Langley ................................................27 KUDZU by Doug Marlette Pope Francis and The Joy of the Gospel By Walter B. Shurden mazon gives it five stars! I think Francis’ intent could not be more Persons, and the
    [Show full text]
  • In God $ Green: an Unholy Alliance Viewers Are Taken on an Eye
    PRESENTS In God $ Green: An Unholy Alliance viewers are taken on an eye-opening journey through decades of religious polarization, political propaganda, corporate deal-making, and environmental injustice based on systemic racism. It’s a story often told in light of social and cultural issues. It’s told less so in relation to the biggest crisis facing us today—climate change. This documentary tells the story of how potent forces came together to mount an army of climate change skeptics in the name of God, country and capitalism. 2020, USA, in English, 19 minutes, 16:9. Featuring Anthea Butler, Richard Cizik, Darren Dochuk, Bob Inglis, Kyle Meyaard-Schaap, Joel Salatin, Katherine Stewart, and Rev. Mariama White-Hammond Directed and Produced by Jeanine Isabel Butler and Catherine Lynn Butler “I think that there is an unholy alliance that formed between the leaders of what passed as the Moral Majority, let’s say, and some people with some very specific economic interests when it comes to climate change. When you allow your faith to be used by people with economic interests, wow, does it get corrupted pretty quickly.” —Bob Inglis A Butlerfilms Production for the Religion, For more information, please contact: Race & Democracy Lab at the University of Virginia Ashley Duffalo Program and Communication Manager UVA Religion, Race & Democracy Lab [email protected] Featured Speakers From left to right: Richard Cizik, Anthea Butler, Rev. Kyle Meyaard-Schaap, Darren Dochuk, Rev. Mariama White-Hammond, Katherine Stewart, Bob Inglis, and Joel Salatin. Anthea Butler Anthea Butler is Associate Professor of Religious Studies and Africana Studies at the University of Pennsylvania.
    [Show full text]
  • Faith in Equality
    FAITH IN EQUALITY Economic Justice and the Future of Religious Progressives E.J. Dionne Jr., William A. Galston, Korin Davis, Ross Tilchin The Governance Studies Program at the Brookings Institution works to improve the performance of our national government and better the economic security, social welfare, and opportunity available to all Americans. Governance Studies enjoys an established reputation for outstanding scholarship and research into U.S. politics and domestic public policy issues, and examines the major institutions of our democracy, including the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government. The Brookings Institution is a private non-profit organization. Its mission is to conduct high-quality, independent research and, based on that research, to provide innovative, practical recommendations for policymakers and the public. The conclusions and recommendations of any Brookings publication are solely those of its author(s), and do not reflect the views of the Institution, its management, or its other scholars. Brookings recognizes that the value it provides is in its absolute commitment to quality, independence and impact. Activities supported by its donors reflect this commitment and the analysis and recommendations are not determined or influenced by any donation. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report and the convening and surveys that informed it would not have been pos- sible without the generous support of the Ford Foundation. We are particularly indebted to Jonathan Barzilay at Ford for his warm encouragement and support. We are grateful to Adam and Ariel Zurofsky and Seymour and Kate Weingarten for their generous sup- port of the survey research on which this report is, in part, based.
    [Show full text]
  • National Wildlife Federation National Conservation Achievement Awards
    NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION NATIONAL CONSERVATION ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS PREVIOUS WINNERS SPECIAL 75TH ANNIVERSARY CONSERVATION AWARD First Lady Michelle Obama JAY N. "DING" DARLING CONSERVATION AWARD 2014 President Bill Clinton 2013 William K. Reilly 2012 Ted Roosevelt IV 2010‐11 Robert Redford 2006 Vice President Al Gore 2005 Stewart Udall 2004 Lady Bird Johnson 2003 Bruce Babbitt 2002 Mardy Murie 2001 Tom Bell 1999 John Chafee (posthumous) 1998 Sylvia Earle 1994 George J. Mitchell 1993 Jimmy Carter *1978 Conservationist of the Year 1992 Maurice F. Strong *1972 International 1991 Fredric Sutherland (posthumous) 1990 Edmund S. Muskie *1966 Legislative/Legal 1989 Gaylord Nelson *1968 Legislative/Legal 1988 Russell E. Train *1974 Conservationist of the Year 1987 Roger Tory Peterson *1974 Special Achievement 1986 C.R. Gutermuth 1985 Morris K. Udall *1973 Legislative/Legal CONSERVATIONIST OF THE YEAR 2013 Chad Holliday 2009 Senator John Warner ` 2007‐08 Senator Tim Wirth 1984 William D. Ruckelshaus 1983 National Academy of Sciences & National Academy of Engineering 1982 S. David Freeman 1981 Glen L. Bowers; Thomas L. Kimball 1980 Cecil D. Andrus; Richard K. Yancy 1979 Frank C. Bellrose 1978 Jimmy Carter; Fred G. Evenden 1977 Butler Derrick 1976 Willaim E. Towell 1975 Warren G. Magnuson *1975 Legislative/Legal 1974 Russell E. Train *1988 Ding Darling 1973 Tom McCall 1972 Jack C. Watson 1971 Russell W. Peterson 1970 H. James Morrison, Jr. 1969 Victor J. Yannacone, Jr. 1968 Orville L. Freeman 1967 Alan Bible; Thomas H. Kuchel 1966 Dorothy A. Buell;
    [Show full text]
  • American Evangelicals and Domestic Versus International Climate Policy Forthcoming at Review of International Organizations
    American Evangelicals and Domestic Versus International Climate Policy Forthcoming at Review of International Organizations Stephen Chaudoin David Thomas Smith Johannes Urpelainen† University of Pittsburgh University of Sydney Columbia University November 11, 2013 ∗We appreciate the helpful comments from Michael Aklin, Andrew Cheon, Kim Sung Eun, Werner Selle, and Shannon Skotece. We also appreciate the helpful assistance from the authors of the Faith and Global Policy Challenges for their publicly available data, and Evan Lewis in particular for his help during the project. Thanks also to Valerie Schlosberg and Ignacio Arana for efforts in research assistance. We owe special appreciation to the xx and xx for making their extensive data publicly available. †Corresponding author. Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Columbia University. 420 West 118th Streeth, 712 IAB. New York, NY 10027, USA. +1-734-757-734-0161. [email protected]. 2 Abstract Because a significant portion of the American electorate identify themselves as evangelical Christians, the evangelical position on climate policy is important to determining the role the United States could play in global climate cooperation. Do evangelicals oppose all climate policies, or are they particularly opposed to certain types of policies? We argue that American evangelicals oppose climate policy due to their distrust of international cooperation and insti- tutions, which has been a prominent feature of evangelical politics since the beginning of the Cold War. Using data from the 2011 Faith and Global Policy Challenges survey and the 2010 Chicago Council Global View survey, we find support for the theory. Evangelicals are equally likely to support domestic climate policy as other Americans, but they are significantly less likely to support international treaties on climate cooperation.
    [Show full text]
  • Pursuing the Global Common Good
    pursuing the common good Principle and Practice in U.S. Foreign Policy Edited by Sally Steenland, Peter Rundlet, Michael H. Fuchs & David Buckley AP Photo 44 Forging a Response to Climate Change Why Communities of Faith Are Essential Barbara Lerman-Golomb and Melody C. Barnes, with Kumar Garg n Christmas Eve in 1968 one of the fi rst (and most famous) pictures of Earth was taken Ofrom space. Called Earthrise, it was taken aboard Apollo 8. Millions watched on television and millions more were captivated by the reprinted picture—a small, beautiful Earth against the blackness of space. Awed by the image outside their window, the astronauts on board read aloud from the book of Genesis. Th e next day was Christmas, and poet Archibald MacLeish expressed humanity’s shared wonderment at the sight of our planet: To see the Earth as it truly is, small and blue and beautiful in that ethereal silence where it fl oats, is to see ourselves riders on the Earth together, brothers on that bright loveliness in the eternal cold—brothers who know now that they are truly brothers.1 Earthrise captured an essential truth—that whatever physical borders or cultural diff erences separate us, we are a global community that will collectively suff er, or benefi t, from how we care for our planet. Th e consequences of our action (and inaction) will be borne not only by us and those near to us, but by billions of our fellow citizens around the globe. Forty years after the Earth picture, such consequences are painfully clear, especially to a small community in the Pacifi c Islands.
    [Show full text]
  • Muhonors1209050053.Pdf (982.74
    Interpreting the Eleventh Commandment: A Look at Creation Care and Its Role in American Politics A thesis submitted to the Miami University Honors and Scholars Program and the Department of Comparative Religion in partial fulfillment of the requirements for University Honors with Distinction and Departmental Honors by Whittney L. Barth May 2008 Miami University Oxford, Ohio ii ABSTRACT Interpreting the Eleventh Commandment: A Look at Creation Care and Its Role in American Politics by Whittney L. Barth Often when words like “Evangelical” and “global climate change” are found in the same sentence, they are accompanied with words like “hoax” or “liberal.” This thesis explores the involvement of Evangelical Christians in the ongoing public discourse about the negative consequences of human action towards the environment. A growing number of Evangelicals—a demographic that voted George W. Bush into office by a margin of four to one—are speaking out in favor of environmental protection. Human-induced global climate change is posited as an issue of immediate concern to this growing movement which has come to be known as Creation Care. Environmental protection is an issue historically not associated with Evangelical concerns, a position acknowledged by many Evangelicals and non-Evangelicals alike. Several statements regarding the environment have been made by various Evangelical organizations and coalitions from 1970 to the present. When analyzing these statements, a trend emerges: as time passes, the statements move away from simple platitudes and skepticism of environmentalism to a more complex position that both embraces environmental stewardship as a Christian duty and challenges the assumptions of what it means to be a conservative Evangelical in America today.
    [Show full text]
  • The Brookings Institution Religion and the Swing Vote
    THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION RELIGION AND THE SWING VOTE Washington, D.C. Monday, February 11, 2008 Introduction and Moderator: WILLIAM A. GALSTON Senior Fellow, Governance Studies Featured Speaker: E.J. DIONNE, JR. Senior Fellow, Governance Studies Panelists: RICHARD CIZIK Vice President for Government Affairs, National Association of Evangelicals PETER STEINFELS Religion Columnist, The New York Times * * * * * 2 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. GALSTON: If we could all begin to move toward our seats, please. The event is about to begin, since we've waited the ritual five extra minutes. Let me begin by introducing myself. I'm Bill Galston, a Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution. And I want to welcome all of you, and I do mean all of you, and there are quite a few of you, to this event, which is, in the first instance, convened to celebrate the publication of E.J. Dionne's latest book, sold out, Reclaiming Faith in Politics After The Religious Right, but more broadly to explore some of the very important questions that this book raises. This event is the latest in a series sponsored by Governance Studies at Brookings. The series is entitled Governing Ideas, and there will be a steady stream of these events, about once a month. And given the nature of this occasion, let me begin in all solemnity with the standard Brookings invocation. Please turn off all of your cell phones, pagers, and any other noise making devices other than your vocal cords. Just a very brief introduction to tee up the conversation.
    [Show full text]
  • Calvin B. Dewitt ______
    CALVIN B. DEWITT _______________________________ PROFESSOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES EMERITUS GAYLORD NELSON INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON MEMBER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN GRADUATE FACULTIES OF: ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCES WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT LIMNOLOGY AND MARINE SCIENCE CONSERVATION BIOLOGY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN TEACHING ACADEMY, FELLOW PRESIDENT EMERITUS, AU SABLE INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES _______________________________ ADDRESS Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies University of Wisconsin-Madison, 70 Science Hall 550 N. Park Street Madison, Wisconsin 53706; Phone: (608) 262-7996 E-mail: [email protected] 2508 Lalor Road Town of Dunn Oregon, Wisconsin 53575; Phone (608) 222-1139 EDUCATION B.A., 1957, Biology, Calvin College M.A., 1958, Biology, University of Michigan Ph.D., 1963, Zoology, University of Michigan PROFESSIONAL Assistant in Biology, Calvin College, 1958-1959. HISTORY National Science Foundation Graduate Fellow, 1960-1961; 1961-1962; 1962-1963. Lecturer in Zoology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1962. Assistant Professor of Biology, The University of Michigan, Dearborn, 1963-1966. Associate Professor of Biology, The University of Michigan, Dearborn, 1966-1969. Professor of Biology, The University of Michigan, Dearborn, 1969-1972. 1 Honorary Fellow in Zoology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1970. Fellow, Calvin College, 1977-1978. Professor of Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1972-2011. Founding
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Conflict Among Evangelicals
    ENVIRONMENTAL CONFLICT AMONG EVANGELICALS BY AMY L. BROWN THIS PAPER WAS PREPARED AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT: ENVIRONMENTAL CONFLICT RESOLUTION SEMINAR LED BY DR. SALEEM H. ALI, FALL, 2006 1 Introduction: In recent years, evangelical Christians in the United States have grown to have considerable power to reach large audiences and affect politics. With as many as 30-35% of Americans describing themselves as “evangelical” or “born-again”, the demographic has the ability to have a profound impact on American society (Institute for the Study of American Evangelicals 2006). While there is a wide range of opinions among them, recently many evangelicals are connecting to the Republican Party and are prioritizing value-based issues, strongly voicing their opposition to abortion and gay marriage. Evangelicals, in general, also tend to promote free-market capitalism, perhaps due to a commitment to a strong work ethic and the belief that governments should not be given authority over what God ultimately controls (Kurtz 2004). The strong alignment of evangelicals on these issues helped secure a Republican victory in recent presidential elections, with George W. Bush receiving up to 78% of the white evangelical vote in 2004 (Pew Research Center 2004). While evangelicals continue to be a political force united on common goals, there is rising awareness and activism on an issue that could serve to split the evangelical vote: the environment. In1967, Lynn White’s essay published in Science, “The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis”, placed a great amount of blame for environmental damage on the Christian religion and its anthropocentric view of the world (White 1967).
    [Show full text]