{"title":"“I Know That Goes Against My Religion”: Explaining Intrafaith Religious Dissent in Latter-Day Saint Views on Abortion with Religious Reflexivity","authors":"Bethany Gull, Ryan T. Cragun","doi":"10.1177/0034673x241248462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While there are a number of studies that note religious individuals do not adhere precisely to the formal doctrines and policies of their faith, few prior studies have attempted to explain why religious individuals dissent from their religion’s official positions. We draw on a religious reflexivity framework with a mixed-methods approach to data collection. The quantitative data is from a survey of Utah residents ( n = 1,909) and provides a rough estimate of the percentage of Mormons who do not hew perfectly to the official position of the religion. The qualitative interviews ( n = 20) illustrate that the members who hold more permissive attitudes toward abortion are aware of their dissent and articulate clear reasons for it. Members who hold more restrictive attitudes appear to be unaware that their views are more extreme than their religion’s teachings. Yet, both more and less restrictive groups tend to use their religion’s teachings—interpreted through varied moral systems—to justify their dissent.","PeriodicalId":47205,"journal":{"name":"Review of Religious Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Religious Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0034673x241248462","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
While there are a number of studies that note religious individuals do not adhere precisely to the formal doctrines and policies of their faith, few prior studies have attempted to explain why religious individuals dissent from their religion’s official positions. We draw on a religious reflexivity framework with a mixed-methods approach to data collection. The quantitative data is from a survey of Utah residents ( n = 1,909) and provides a rough estimate of the percentage of Mormons who do not hew perfectly to the official position of the religion. The qualitative interviews ( n = 20) illustrate that the members who hold more permissive attitudes toward abortion are aware of their dissent and articulate clear reasons for it. Members who hold more restrictive attitudes appear to be unaware that their views are more extreme than their religion’s teachings. Yet, both more and less restrictive groups tend to use their religion’s teachings—interpreted through varied moral systems—to justify their dissent.
期刊介绍:
The Review of Religious Research (RRR) publishes empirical social science research on religion, primarily in sociology and social psychology and related fields of psychology, and scholarly literature reviews of research in these fields. RRR provides a forum for research across multiple disciplines and approaches, including research on the following topical areas: Clergy; Church programs; Comparative analyses of religious denominations and institutions; Denominational and congregational growth, decline, and vitality; Denominational and congregational conflict, competition, and cooperation; Ethnicity/race and religion; Generational and personal religious change; New religious movements; Personal spiritual and religious beliefs and practices; Religion and attitudes; Religion and family; Religion and gender, Religion and social behavior; Religion and well-being; and Research methodology. Among the characteristics that distinguish RRR from other academic journals on the study of religion are its applied focus and the opportunities it offers for academics and denomination-based researchers to share their findings with each other. RRR aims to facilitate the sharing and comparing of applied studies between denominational and academic researchers. RRR is the official quarterly journal of the Religious Research Association, Inc. RRR regularly publishes Original Articles, Research Notes, Review Articles, Applied Research Abstracts, and Book Reviews, and occasionally publishes articles on the Context of Religious Research. Applied Research Abstracts: This type of publication (previously called Denominational Research Reports) consists of a 350-550 word summary (without any references) of an applied research study in the form of a structured abstract, with the following section headings: Background, Purpose, Methods, Results, and Conclusions and Implications, followed by 3-4 keywords. The author may included a footnote that states: (a) whether a complete report exists and how it can be obtained; (b) whether the raw data are available in electronic form and how they can be obtained if the authors wish to make them available to other researchers; and (c) whether the authors would like to collaborate with other researchers to further analyze the data and write a full report for possible journal publication as a peer-reviewed manuscript. Such abstracts should be submitted to the journal editor for consideration for publication. Book Reviews: Unsolicited book reviews are not accepted for publication in RRR. If you would like to review a book for the journal, contact the Book Review Editor, David Eagle, Ph.D. – david.eagle@duke.edu Context of Religious Research: This journal heading covers items about awards and announcements, memoriams, and articles about the research process (e.g., articles on research methods and statistics, and profiles of denominational research organizations), as well as invited addresses to the Religious Research Association. Unsolicited articles should be submitted to the journal editor for consideration for publication. Original Articles: These are scholarly and methodologically sophisticated research studies: see Information for Authors on this website and the Submission Guidelines on the Springer RRR website for details (https://www.springer.com/13644) Reseach Notes: These are scholarly and methodologically sophisticated research studies: see Information for Authors on this website and the Submission Guidelines on the Springer RRR website for details (https://www.springer.com/13644) Review Articles: Authors should send an email to the journal’s editor describing the nature and scope of a proposed literature review to see if it is suitable for publication in RRR. See Information for Authors on this website and the Submission Guidelines on the Springer RRR website for details (https://www.springer.com/13644) The journal’s editor is Kevin J. Flannelly, Ph.D. – kjflannelly@gmail.com