Abstract

This paper investigates the salience of religion and the centrality of religiosity among select LGBTQs. Much consideration has been given to the identity categories of sex, gender, sexual orientation, and religion. Means (M) and standard deviations (SD) were calculated for the overall CRSi-20 score and its five subscales. The results show that the overall CRSi-20 score is 3.68 (SD = 0.89), which indicates that the select LGBTQs are “religious”. As for the core dimensions of religiosity, the ideology subscale received the highest mean score (M = 4.16, SD = 0.88) while the public practice subscale received the lowest mean score (M = 3.21, SD = 1.15). The overall reliability of the survey is computed at 0.96, while the rest of the subscales have alpha values ranging from 0.81 to 0.95. Study outcomes confirm the general religiosity of participants, particularly among older respondents. Of the five subscales, ideology and private practice emerge as dominant categories. In terms of sex distribution, men tend to self-describe as “highly religious” in relation to women, who identify largely as “religious”.

Highlights

  • In October 2020, news proliferated online concerning a statement by Pope Francis expressing clear support for civil unions

  • The researchers observed the lack of structural resources that attended to the lived realities of persons who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ)

  • Since this paper investigates the salience of religion and the centrality of religiosity among select LGBTQs, much consideration has been given to the identity categories of sex, gender, sexual orientation, and religion

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In October 2020, news proliferated online concerning a statement by Pope Francis expressing clear support for civil unions. It was controversial as much for its content as its context—seemingly an advice given to a gay, partnered Roman Catholic who longed to raise his children in the church. While literature on religious education and sexuality exists, few account for the experiences of Filipino LGBTQs, their understandings of “religion”, “God”, “faith”, and questions of meaning. To what extent do ministers and religious workers affirm and/or discount the religious experiences of Filipino LGBTQs when these fall outside the purview of institutional language? How do religious beliefs influence the subjective experience and behavior of Filipino LGBTQs? How can empirical data refine the assumptions of faith that churches uphold within the diverse landscape of human sexualities? To what extent do ministers and religious workers affirm and/or discount the religious experiences of Filipino LGBTQs when these fall outside the purview of institutional language? How do religious beliefs influence the subjective experience and behavior of Filipino LGBTQs?

Methods
Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.