Beyond the Liberal-Conservative Divide: Assessing the Relationship Between Religious Denominations and Their Associated LGBT Organizations

Abstract

Emerging research suggests that existing culture, including religious culture, serves to constrain and enable the rhetoric and claims of social actors in situations of conflict and change. Given that religious institutions continue to have significant authority in framing moral debates in the United States, we hypothesize that groups connected to each other through a religious tradition will share similar orientations towards the moral order, shaping the kinds of rhetoric they use and the kinds of claims they can make. To test this, we compare the official rhetoric of the 25 largest religious denominations on gay and lesbian issues, as well as their orientation towards the moral order more broadly, with the rhetoric of each denomination’s respective movement for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender inclusion, affirmation, or rights. We use Kniss’ heuristic map of the moral order to analyze and theorize about the patterns that emerge from these comparisons. Ultimately, we find that the existing rhetoric of the parent denomination on gay and lesbian issues, along with the broader moral stances they take, do appear to shape the rhetoric and ideologies of associated pro-LGBT organizations. This provides support for the notion that existing culture, belief, and rhetoric shape the trajectories of conflict and change.