Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T18:36:31.450Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Abortion Politics and the Decline of the Separation of Church and State: The Southern Baptist Case

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2014

Andrew R. Lewis
Andrew R. Lewis*
Affiliation:
University of Cincinnati
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Andrew R. Lewis, University of Cincinnati2600 Clifton Avenue, 1102 Crosley Tower, Cincinnati, OH 45221. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Between the late 1970s and early 1990s, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) altered its First Amendment advocacy, shifting from being an ardent supporter of the strict separation of church and state to being a champion of the government accommodation of religion. At the same time, the denomination also became unswervingly pro-life. In this article, I use the SBC case to identify a previously under-analyzed link between abortion politics and church-state politics. I suggest that pro-life politics played an important role in the SBC's shift away from the separation of church and state. I focus on three areas where abortion politics aided this shift: (1) opposing separationists’ assertions that anti-abortion policies violated the Establishment Clause; (2) becoming allies rather than foes with Catholics; and (3) promoting a greater emphasis on the free exercise of religion. I conclude by discussing the implications for the relationship between religion, law, and politics.

Type
Articles
Information
Politics and Religion , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , September 2014 , pp. 521 - 549
Copyright
Copyright © Religion and Politics Section of the American Political Science Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

American Ethical Union et al. 1971. “Motion of American Ethical Union, American Friends Committee, American Humanist Association, American Jewish Congress, Episcopal Diocese of New York, New York State Council of Churches, Union of American Hebrew Congregations, Unitarian Universalist Association, United Church of Christ and the Board of Christian Social Concerns of the United Methodist Church for Leave to file a Brief as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellants' Position, with the Proposed Brief Attached.” In Mary Doe, et al. v. Arthur K. Bolton; Jane Roe, et al. v. Henry Wade. New York.Google Scholar
American Ethical Union et al. 1979. “Brief for Amici Curiae American Ethical Union; American Humanist Association; Board of Church and Society, United Methodist Church; Catholics for a Free Choice, Church of the Bretheren; Department of Church Women of the Division of Homeland Ministries, Christian Church (Disciples of Christ); National Federation of Temple Sisterhoods; National Women's Conference of the American Ethical Union; Unitarian Universalist Association; Unitarian Universalist Women's Federation; Union of American Hebrew Congregations; Young Women's Christian Association.” In Patricia A. Harris v. Cora McRae, et al. Brooklyn, NY.Google Scholar
American Jewish Congress et al. 1976. “Brief of American Jewish Congress, Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church, National Women's Conference of the American Ethical Union, New York State Council of Churches, Union of American Hebrew Congregations and Unitarian Universalist Women's Federation, Amici Curiae.” In John H. Poelker v. Jane Doe. New York.Google Scholar
Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. 1989. “Brief of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State as Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellees.” In William L. Webster, et al. v. Reproductive Health Services, et al. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Ammerman, Nancy Tatom. 1995. Baptist Battles: Social Change and Religious Conflict in the Southern Baptist Convention. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs et al. 1988. “Brief of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, the American Jewish Committee, and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellees.” In Otis R. Bowen v. Chan Kendrick, et al. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Baptists Among Signers of Abortion Rights Statement. 1979. Baptist Public Affairs, October 26.Google Scholar
Baptists Will Examine Evangelism, Freedom. 1981. Baptist Public Affairs, September 8.Google Scholar
Berg, Thomas C. 2001. “Anti-Catholicism and Modern Church-State Relations.” Loyola University of Chicago Law Journal 33: 121–172.Google Scholar
Brown, Stephen P. 2002. Trumping Religion: The New Christian Right, the Free Speech Clause, and the Courts. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Djupe, Paul A., Lewis, Andrew R., Jelen, Ted G., and Dahan, Charles D.. 2014. “Rights Talk: The Opinion Dynamics of Rights Framing.” Social Science Quarterly. doi:10.1111/ssqu.12083.Google Scholar
Drakeman, Donald L. 2010. Church, State, and Original Intent. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dunn, James. 1981. Public Money for Public Purposes. Baptist Public Affairs, June 29, 1981.Google Scholar
Dunn, James. 2010. Interview with the Author. Philadelphia, August 4, 2010 and September 16, 2010.Google Scholar
Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention et al. 2010. “Brief of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, the National Association of Evangelicals, and the Convocation of Anglicans in North America as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners.” In Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Kathleen M. Winn, et al. Nashville.Google Scholar
Farnsley, Arthur Emery II. 1994. Southern Baptist Politics: Authority and Power in the Restructuring of an American Denomination. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Hacker, Hans J. 2005. The Culture of Conservative Litigation. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Hamburger, Philip. 2002. Separation of Church and State. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hankins, Barry. 2002. Uneasy in Babylon: Southern Baptist Conservatives and American Culture. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Harris, Secretary of Health and Human Services v McRae et al. 1980. United States Supreme Court.Google Scholar
Hastey, Stan. 1980. “Wood Hails Ruling Upholding Federal Abortion Funding.” Baptist Press, January 17, 2–3.Google Scholar
Hastey, Stan. 1985. “The History and Contributions of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs.” Baptist History and Heritage 20: 35–43.Google Scholar
Hoffman, John P., and Johnson, Sherrie Mills. 2005. “Attitudes toward Abortion among Religious Traditionalists in the United States: Change or Continuity?” Sociology of Religion 66: 161–182.Google Scholar
Hunter, James D. 1991. Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Jelen, Ted G. 2000. To Serve God and Mammon: Church-State Relations in American Politics. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Jelen, Ted G. 2005. “Political Esperanto: Rhetorical Resources and Limitations of the Christian Right in the United States.” Sociology of Religion 66: 303–321.Google Scholar
Jelen, Ted G., and Wilcox, Clyde. 1995. Public Attitudes toward Church and State. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Jelen, Ted G., and Wilcox, Clyde. 2003. “Causes and Consequences of Public Attitudes toward Abortion: A Review and Research Agenda.” Political Research Quarterly 56: 489–500.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R. 1998. “Communication and Opinion.” Annual Review of Political Science 1: 167–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Martin. 1995. “Land and Lewis Remove Names from Controversial Document.” Baptist Press, April 7, 1.Google Scholar
Land, Richard D. 2010. Interview with the Author. Nashville, August 9, 13, 2010.Google Scholar
Layman, Geoffrey C. 2001. The Great Divide: Religious and Cultural Conflict in American Party Politics. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, Andrew R. 2011. “The Southern Baptist Church-State ‘Culture War:’ The Internal Politics of Denominational Advocacy.” Ph.D. diss. American University, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Lupu, Ira C. 1991. “Reconstructing the Establishment Clause: The Case against Discretionary Accommodation of Religion.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 140: 555–612.Google Scholar
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod et al. 1989. “Brief of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, the Christian Life Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, and the National Association of Evangelicals as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellants.” In William L. Webster, et al. v. Reproductive Health Services, et al. St. Louis.Google Scholar
Majority Report of SBC Executive Committee on Baptist Joint Committee. 1990. SBC Today, June, 10.Google Scholar
McConnell, Michael W. 1992. “Accommodation of Religion: An Update and a Response to the Critics.” George Washington Law Review 60: 685–742.Google Scholar
McDaniel, Charles. 2008. “Guest Editorial: The Decline of the Separation Principle in the Baptist Tradition of Religious Liberty.” Journal of Church and State 50: 413–430.Google Scholar
McLoughlin, William. 1971. New England Dissent 1960–1833: The Baptists and Separation of Church and State. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McLoughlin, William. 1991. Soul Liberty: The Baptists' Struggle in New England, 1630–1833. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
McRae v. Califano. 1980. United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.Google Scholar
Moe, Terry M. 1980. The Organization of Interests: Incentives and the Internal Dynamics of Political Interest Groups. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Moore, Louis. 1989. “CLC Files First Briefs in Supreme Court.” Baptist Press, February 27, 6.Google Scholar
National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. 1980. “Brief of Amicus Curiae on Behalf of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A.” In Patricia Harris, et al. v. Cora McRae. San Francisco.Google Scholar
Patterson, Paige. 2010. Interview with the Author. Philadelphia, August 18, 2010.Google Scholar
Perry, Pam. 1996. On Guard for Religious Liberty: Six Decades of the Baptist Joint Committee. Macon, GA: Smith & Helwys.Google Scholar
Religious Liberty Bill before Congress Highlights Difference among Baptists. 1991. SBC Today, July 26, 1991, 1.Google Scholar
Resolution on Abortion. 1971. St. Louis: Southern Baptist Convention.Google Scholar
Resolution on Abortion. 1980. St. Louis: Southern Baptist Convention.Google Scholar
Resolution on Parental Choice in Education. 1991. Atlanta: Southern Baptist Convention.Google Scholar
Resolution on Protestants and Other Americans United for Separation of Church and State. 1948. Memphis: Southern Baptist Convention.Google Scholar
Resolution on Religious Liberty and No Establishment of Religion. 1972. Philadelphia: Southern Baptist Convention.Google Scholar
Resolution on Voluntary Prayer. 1971. St. Louis: Southern Baptist Convention.Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda. 2003. Diminished Democracy: From Membership to Management in American Civic Life. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, Paul D. 1990. “Religious Liberty and the Abortion Debate.” Journal of Church and State 32: 567–584.Google Scholar
Smith, Oran P. 1997. The Rise of Baptist Republicanism. New York, NY: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Strode, Tom. 1991a. “BJCPA Asks Supreme Court to Maintain Religion Test.” SBC Today, September 20, 5.Google Scholar
Strode, Tom. 1991b. “CLC Endorses RFRA; BJC Mum on Abortion.” Light, October-December, 15.Google Scholar
Truett, George W. 2011 [1920]. “Baptists and Religious Liberty. Nashville: The Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention.” http://www.bjconline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=51&Itemid=73 (Accessed on January 18, 2011).Google Scholar
United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. 1980. “The United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. for Leave to File Brief Amicus Curiae Out of Time and Brief Amicus Curiae.” In Patricia Harris, et al. v. Cora McRae, et al. San Francisco.Google Scholar
United States Catholic Conference. 1980. “Brief of the United States Catholic Conference, Amicus Curiae.” In Patricia R. Harris v. Cora McRae, et al. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
United States Catholic Conference et al. 1992. “Brief Amicus Curiae of the United States Catholic Conference, the Christian Life Commission, Southern Baptist Convention, and the National Association of Evangelicals in Support of Respondents and Cross-Petitioners.” In Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania, et al. v. Robert P. Casey, et al. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Various. 1994. “Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium.” First Things, May.Google Scholar
Workman, Skeet. 1986. Letter to Rev. Gary Young, August 27, 1986.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Lewis Supplementary Material

Appendix

Download Lewis Supplementary Material(File)
File 28.3 KB