Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

My Friend is Gay, But… The Effects of Social Contact on Christian Evangelicals’ Beliefs About Gays and Lesbians

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Review of Religious Research

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between social contact with gays and lesbians and beliefs about homosexuality, and explicitly investigates whether this relationship is different for Christian evangelicals than for others. We find that although social contact with gays and lesbians is related to beliefs about homosexuality in ways predicted by social contact theory, those with a gay or lesbian friend hold more positive attitudes, this is not the case for Christian evangelicals. In fact, analyses reveal that the effect of social contact for Christian evangelicals is significantly less than the effect for non-evangelicals. Results suggest that social contact alone is not enough to positively change Christian evangelicals’ beliefs about gay and lesbian individuals. This research adds to our knowledge about social contact by providing empirical evidence that all subgroups of the population are not affected equally by social contact with minority groups—an important piece of information for theoretical developments and policy makers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The NAE was formed in 1942 as “a middle course between modernism on the left and separatist fundamentalism… on the right” (Hankins 2008: 36–37).

  2. The only variable with a non-trivial number of missing was income, where approximately 20 % were missing. We estimated all models with and without income, following listwise deletion (N = 3,261 with income or N = 3,970 without income variables) and using the analysis sample described here (N = 3,261). The results across specifications were virtually identical and we elected to show those using listwise deletion and including the income variable.

  3. Only 10 % of respondents offered “it depends” and we estimated models where we included them with the “morally wrong” group and obtained similar results to those shown here.

  4. Three different versions of this question were asked at different years. “Do you have a friend who is gay or lesbian?” was asked in 2005 and 2007; “Do you have a personal friend who is gay or lesbian?” was asked in 2001; and “Do you have a close personal friend who is gay or lesbian?” was asked in 2004, 2009, 2011, and 2013. Obviously, these later versions of the question will capture a more intense level of social contact than the first version listed. To estimate models with data from more than one year we combine these into one variable.

  5. The KHAS does not provide more detailed denomination so creating coding schemas similar to those recommended when using the GSS was not possible (Steensland et al. 2000). We did investigate alternative categories (specifically attempting to separate Black Protestants) but given the crude denomination categories at our disposal we feel the categories listed here are the most appropriate. Additionally, our key findings did not change when we used the different denomination categories. We do have more detailed information for the “other religion” category, but sample sizes were too small to have the separate categories in our analyses.

  6. We also created a variable that also included non-denominational Protestants who were biblical literalists as evangelicals. The results were similar for the measure of whether homosexuality was morally wrong, but in the models of the primary cause of homosexuality this broader measure of evangelicalism was not statistically significant. Given the very broad categories for affiliation in the KHAS we feel that including non-denominational Protestants as evangelicals would result in a variable that was not valid.

  7. In other analyses not shown here we estimated models with religion predicting social contact and found a strong effect—evangelicals are less likely to have social contact with gays and lesbians. However, since a full exploration of this relationship is beyond the scope of this study do not present those findings here.

  8. This interaction term can also be interpreted as revealing that the effect of religion on attitudes is more for those with a gay or lesbian friend.

  9. Of course, biblical literalists and evangelicals are not necessarily the same people. There are some respondents included in our measure of biblical literalism who are not be identified as evangelicals once we account for affiliation.

References

  • Adler, Gary. 2012. An opening in the congregational closet? Boundary-bridging culture and membership privileges for gays and lesbians in christian religious congregations. Social Problems 59(2): 177–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allport, Gordon W. 1954. The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altemeyer, Bob, and Bruce Hunsberger. 1992. Authoritarianism, religious evangelicalism, quest, and prejudice. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 2(2): 113–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barth, Jay, and Janine Parry. 2009. 2>1+1? The impact of contact with gay and lesbian couples on attitudes about gays/lesbians and gay-related policies. Politics & Policy 37(1): 31–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baunach, Dawn M., Elisabeth O. Burgess, and Courtney S. Muse. 2010. Southern (dis)comfort: Sexual prejudice and contact with gay men and lesbians in the south. Sociological Spectrum 30(1): 30–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, Anne M., and Martin J. Bourgeois. 2001. Attitudes toward lesbian, gay, and bisexual college students: The contribution of pluralistic ignorance, dynamic social impact, and contact theories. Journal of American College Health 50(2): 91–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bramlett, Brittany H. 2012. The cross-pressures of religion and contact with gays and lesbians, and their impact on same-sex marriage opinion. Politics & Policy 40(1): 13–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Michael J., and Ernesto Henriquez. 2011. Support for gay and lesbian civil rights: Development and examination of a new scale. Journal of Homosexuality 58(4): 462–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R.Khari, and Ronald E. Brown. 2011. The challenge of religious pluralism: The association between interfaith contact and religious pluralism. Review of Religious Research 53(3): 323–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cadge, Wendy, Jennifer Girouard, Laura R. Olson, and Madison Lylerohr. 2012. Uncertainty in clergy’s perspectives on homosexuality: A research note. Review of Religious Research 54(3): 371–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CNN. 2010. Americans split evenly on gay marriage. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/11/americans-split-evenly-on-gay-marriage/.

  • Cornwall, Marie, Stan L. Albrecht, Perry H. Cunningham, and Brian L. Pitcher. 1986. The dimensions of religiosity: A conceptual model and an empirical test. Review of Religious Research 27(3): 226–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duck, Robert J., and Bruce Hunsberger. 1999. Religious orientation and prejudice: The role of religious proscription, right-wing. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 9(3): 157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fetner, Tina. 2001. Working Anita Bryant: The impact of Christian anti-gay activism on lesbian and gay movement claims. Social Problems 48(3): 411–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fetner, Tina. 2008. How the religious right shaped lesbian and gay activism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finlay, Barbara, and Carol S. Walther. 2003. The relation of religious affiliation, service attendance, and other factors to homophobic attitudes among university students. Review of Religious Research 44(4): 370–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, Sally K. 2004. The marginalization of evangelical femininism. Sociology of Religion 65(3): 215–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallup. 2011. For the first time, majority of Americans favor legal gay marriage. http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/first-time-majority-americans-favor-legal-gay-marriage.aspx.

  • Goffman, Erving. 1963. Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hankins, Barry. 2008. American evangelicals: A contemporary history of a mainstream religious movement. Lanham, MD: The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, Lynn M., and John P. Bartkowski. 2008. Scripture, sin and salvation: Theological conservatism reconsidered. Social Forces 86(4): 1647–1674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herek, Gregory M. 2000. The psychology of sexual prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological Science 9(1): 19–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herek, Gregory M. 2011. Anti-equality marriage amendments and sexual stigma. Journal of Social Issues 67(2): 413–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herek, Gregory M., and John P. Capitanio. 1996. “Some of my best friends”: Intergroup contact, concealable stigma, and heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men and lesbians. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 22(4): 412–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herek, Gregory M., and Eric Glunt. 1993. ‘Interpersonal contact and heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men: Results from a national survey’. Journal of Sex Research 30: 239–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, Eric D., Heather K. Terrell, Adam B. Cohen, and Craig T. Nagoshi. 2010. The role of social cognition in the religious evangelicalism-prejudice relationship. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 49(4): 724–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinrichs, Donald W., and Pamela J. Rosenberg. 2002. Attitudes toward gay, lesbian, and bisexual persons among heterosexual liberal arts college students. Journal of Homosexuality 43(1): 61–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, Gordon, Hannah Harry, and Andrea Mitchell. 2009. Independent benefits of contact and friendship on attitudes toward homosexuals among authoritarians and highly identified heterosexuals. European Journal of Social Psychology 39: 509–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughey, Matthew W. 2012. White bound: Nationalist, antiracists, and the shared meaning of race. Standford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, Mark E., Christiana Brems, and Pat Alford-Keating. 1997. Personality correlates of homophobia. Journal of Homosexuality 34(1): 57–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, Megan K., Wade C. Rowatt, Lucy M. Barnard-Brak, Julie A. Patock-Peckham, Jordan P. LaBouff, and Robert D. Carlisle. 2011. A mediational analysis of the role of right-wing authoritarianism and religious evangelicalism in the religiosity-prejudice link. Personality and Individual Differences 50: 851–856.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinder Institute for Urban Research. 2011. Kinder Houston area survey. http://has.rice.edu/.

  • Lewis, Gregory B. 2011. The friends and family plan: Contact with gays and support for gay rights. The Policy Studies Journal 39(2): 217–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFarland, Sam G. 1989. Religious orientations and the targets of discrimination. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 28(3): 324–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McQueeney, Krista. 2009. ‘We are God’s children, Y’All:’ Race, gender, and sexuality in lesbian- and gay-affirming congregations. Social Problems 56(1): 151–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McVeigh, Rory, and Maria-Elena D. Diaz. 2009. Voting to ban same-sex marriage: Interests, values, and communities. American Sociological Review 74(6): 891–915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, Scott M. 1996. An interactive model of religiosity inheritance: The importance of family context. American Sociological Review 61(5): 858–866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, Laura R., Wendy Cadge, and James T. Harrison. 2006. Religion and public opinion about same-sex marriage. Social Science Quarterly (Blackwell Publishing Limited) 87(2): 340–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, Thomas F. 1998. Intergroup contact theory. Annual Reviews Psychology 49: 65–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, Thomas F., and Linda R. Tropp. 2006. A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90(5): 751–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regnerus, Mark D., Christian Smith, and Brad Smith. 2004. Social context in the development of adolescent religiosity. Applied Developmental Science 8(1): 27–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, Eric M. 2006. At the intersection of church and gay: Religion, spirituality, conflict, and integration in gay, lesbian, and bisexual people of faith. PhD Dissertation, Department of Social and Personality Psychology, The City University of New York City, NY.

  • Rowatt, Wade C., Jo-Ann Tsang, Jessica Kelly, Brooke LaMartina, Michelle McCullers, and April McKinley. 2006. Associations between religious personality dimensions and implicit homosexual prejudice. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 45(3): 397–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saucier, Donald A., and Audrey J. Cawman. 2004. Civil unions in vermont: Political attitudes, religious evangelicalism, and sexual prejudice. Journal of Homosexuality 48(1): 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheitle, Christopher P., and Bryanna B. Hahn. 2011. From the pews to policy: Specifying evangelical Protestantism’s influence on states’ sexual orientation policies. Social Forces 89(3): 913–933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulte, Lisa J., and Juan Battle. 2004. The relative importance of ethnicity and religion in predicting attitudes towards gays and lesbians. Journal of Homosexuality 47(2): 127–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, Jonathan P., and Lori D. Lindley. 2005. Religious evangelicalism and attachment: Prediction of homophobia. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 15(2): 145–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherkat, Darren E. 1998. Counterculture or continuity? Competing influences on baby boomers’ religious orientations and participation. Social Forces 76(3): 1087–1115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherkat, Darren E., Melissa Powell-Williams, Gregory Maddox, and Kylan Mattias de Vries. 2011. Religion, politics, and support for same-sex marriage in the United States. Social Science Research 40: 167–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Christian. 2000. Christian America? What evangelicals really want. Berkeley: University of California Press.

  • Smith, Christian, Michael Emerson, Sally Gallagher, Paul Kennedy, and David Sikkink. 1998. American evangelicalism: Embattled and thriving. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steensland, Brian, Jerry Z. Park, Mark D. Regnerus, Lynn D. Robinson, W. Bradford Wilcox, and Robert D. Woodberry. 2000. The measure of American religion: Toward improving the state of the art. Social Forces 79(1): 291–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavares, Carols Daniel. 2011. Why can’t we be friends: The role of religious congregation-based social contact for close interracial adolescent friendships. Review of Religious Research 52(4): 439–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vicario, Brett A., Becky J. Liddle, and Darrell Anthony Luzzo. 2005. The role of values in understanding attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Journal of Homosexuality 49(1): 145–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werum, Regina, and Bill Winders. 2001. Who’s ‘in’ and who’s ‘out’: State fragmentation and the struggle over gay rights, 1974–1999. Social Problems 48(3): 386–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, Andrew L. 2013. Religious organizations and homosexuality: The acceptance of gays and lesbians in american congregations. Review of Religious Research 55(2): 297–317.

  • Whitley Jr., Bernard E. 2009. Religiosity and attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: A meta-analysis. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 19: 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, Wayne W. 2004. Religiosity, authoritarianism, and homophobia: A multidimensional approach. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 14(1): 55–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittig, Michel A., and Shelia Grant-Thompson. 1998. The utility of allport’s conditions of intergroup contact for predicting perceptions of improved racial attitudes and beliefs. Journal of Social Issues 54(4): 795–812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodberry, Robert D., Jerry Z. Park, Lyman A. Kellstedt, Mark D. Regnerus, and Brian Steensland. 2012. The measure of american religious tradtions: Theoretical and measurement considerations. Social Forces 91(1): 65–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Kimberly Kelly, Shelley Matthews, Lindsey Peterson, Matthew Hughey, anonymous reviewers, and the journal editors for their valuable assistance with this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, Mississippi State University, PO Box C, Mississippi State, MS, 39762, USA

    Ashley A. Baker

  2. McGill University, Room 713, Leacock Building, 855 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, QC, H3A 2T7, Canada

    Sarah R. Brauner-Otto

Authors
  1. Ashley A. Baker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarah R. Brauner-Otto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ashley A. Baker.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 6.

Table 6 Weighted logistic regressions
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baker, A.A., Brauner-Otto, S.R. My Friend is Gay, But… The Effects of Social Contact on Christian Evangelicals’ Beliefs About Gays and Lesbians. Rev Relig Res 57, 239–268 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13644-014-0184-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13644-014-0184-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation