Polarization In America
The United States is known for its deeply religious history, as well as its tolerant religious diversity. However, this religious dynamic has been faced with some shocks. On the other hand, the religious diversity of this nation continues to grow with non-Western religions making a presence in our nation in the recent years. Despite this growth in religious diversity, the United States is still known for its Christian traditions. By looking at these concepts of thinking, it is clear that there are certain patterns that American religiosity is taking. The argument that American religion has been experiencing disturbances within the past decades exhibits the truth for me. The drastic political and religious shifts an after shocks displayed
…show more content…
According to Putnam and Campbell, the three relevant seismic shocks occurred in three waves. The first wave occurred in the sixties, while the second happened in the seventies and eighties; lastly, the third wave spans from the nineties and beyond. For instance, the early signs of polarization transpired in 1960, where a Catholic candidate, John F. Kennedy assured the public that it is harmless to vote for a Catholic (Robert Putnam, 2010). This is where we see early signs of religious polarization in which “tribal loyalty” divided voters, as each voted based their decision significantly on the candidates religion (Robert Putnam, 2010). This sort of rhetoric still exists today, where certain voters identify with a candidate based solely on their religious affiliation in the hopes of keeping their morals intact. To me, this example of how religion can influence political actions, such as polarization, solidifies Putnam and Campbell’s arguments. As I mentioned before, we see this in American politics now, where presidential candidates, such as Cruz and Clinton discuss their faith on rallies to secure votes from those who similarly identify with their …show more content…
This shift led to the doing away of traditional norms, such as sexual norms, where premarital sex has become wildly accepted (rose from 24% to 47%) (Robert Putnam, 2010). To add, many denominations faced problems of clergy losing their calling or way (Robert Putnam, 2010). These very radical examples prompted the rise of religious conservatism in the 70s and the eighties. Similar to the earlier example of “tribal loyalty”, the far-reaching changes in tradition of the previous decade gave rise for an after shock, where the society chose to lean as far away from the extreme side. The GSS evidence in the book shows that college-educated youth reconnected with organized religion (Robert Putnam, 2010). For these next two decades, the conservatism within religion and politics expanded in evangelical Protestant and Christian denominations (Robert Putnam, 2010). Clearly, this after shock is a logical way for a society to shape itself after such serious alteration of the norms. I believe that human nature have no other choice but to seek radical changes truly reject the changes that spoiled customs that they previously cherished. These changes were so stringent that another after shock was recognized two decades after the first one. According to Putnam and Campbell, the
According to Putnam and Campbell, the three relevant seismic shocks occurred in three waves. The first wave occurred in the sixties, while the second happened in the seventies and eighties; lastly, the third wave spans from the nineties and beyond. For instance, the early signs of polarization transpired in 1960, where a Catholic candidate, John F. Kennedy assured the public that it is harmless to vote for a Catholic (Robert Putnam, 2010). This is where we see early signs of religious polarization in which “tribal loyalty” divided voters, as each voted based their decision significantly on the candidates religion (Robert Putnam, 2010). This sort of rhetoric still exists today, where certain voters identify with a candidate based solely on their religious affiliation in the hopes of keeping their morals intact. To me, this example of how religion can influence political actions, such as polarization, solidifies Putnam and Campbell’s arguments. As I mentioned before, we see this in American politics now, where presidential candidates, such as Cruz and Clinton discuss their faith on rallies to secure votes from those who similarly identify with their …show more content…
This shift led to the doing away of traditional norms, such as sexual norms, where premarital sex has become wildly accepted (rose from 24% to 47%) (Robert Putnam, 2010). To add, many denominations faced problems of clergy losing their calling or way (Robert Putnam, 2010). These very radical examples prompted the rise of religious conservatism in the 70s and the eighties. Similar to the earlier example of “tribal loyalty”, the far-reaching changes in tradition of the previous decade gave rise for an after shock, where the society chose to lean as far away from the extreme side. The GSS evidence in the book shows that college-educated youth reconnected with organized religion (Robert Putnam, 2010). For these next two decades, the conservatism within religion and politics expanded in evangelical Protestant and Christian denominations (Robert Putnam, 2010). Clearly, this after shock is a logical way for a society to shape itself after such serious alteration of the norms. I believe that human nature have no other choice but to seek radical changes truly reject the changes that spoiled customs that they previously cherished. These changes were so stringent that another after shock was recognized two decades after the first one. According to Putnam and Campbell, the