US believers favor international action on climate change, nuclear risk: poll

Dec 07, 2011
Though most believers in the research do not consider addressing environmental and nuclear risks to be spiritual obligations, they do understand these issues as a part of "good stewardship," the study finds. Credit: Image: Wonderlane/Creative Commons

A majority of Americans professing belief in God favor cooperative international efforts to combat climate change and the spread of nuclear weapons - branding it a moral obligation - says a new public opinion poll conducted jointly by the University of Maryland's Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM) and its Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA).

The nearly 1,500 Americans surveyed include large numbers of Catholics and Evangelicals.

The study,"Faith and Global Policy Challenges: How Spiritual Values Shape Views on Poverty, Nuclear Risks, and ," also finds that a majority of believers consider addressing global poverty a "spiritual obligation," and think that the United States should work cooperatively with other nations to reduce it.

"This research challenges common political stereotypes that pigeonhole religious Americans as liberal or conservative on environmental and nuclear proliferation issues," says University of Maryland Public Policy Professor and study co-author John Steinbruner, who directs CISSM.

"These findings demonstrate the public's strong moral impulse to address global policy challenges - an impulse that if applied properly could break the current impasse on these issues," Steinbruner adds.

Though most believers in the research do not consider addressing environmental and nuclear risks to be spiritual obligations, they do understand these issues as a part of "good stewardship," the study finds.

"While for many believers there is a tenuous connection between their spiritual values and issues related to the environment and the risk of nuclear war, they are nonetheless very responsive to the idea that there is an obligation to protect God's creation, or to be good stewards of the earth," explains study co-author Steven Kull, director of PIPA.

SPECIFIC FINDINGS

STEWARDSHIP: 3 out of 4 believers embrace the idea that they have an obligation to act as good stewards of the environment; 4 out 10 believers say the obligation to be a good steward of the environment includes the obligation to prevent nuclear war.

ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS: 2 out of 3 believers agree that there is an obligation to care for God's creation by supporting environmental laws and regulations.

BINDING INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS: Majorities of believers approve of the United States entering into binding international agreements aimed at protecting the environment (including by reducing greenhouse gases) and reducing the risk of nuclear war.

  • 7 in 10 believers reject the argument that reducing greenhouse gases would be too harmful to the economy, instead favoring the idea that it will help the economy in the long rung through greater energy efficiency.
  • 8 in 10 believers support negotiating an international agreement to lower the number of nuclear weapons on high alert.
  • A majority of believers support pursuing the elimination of nuclear weapons.
SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS ON : Only four in ten (three in ten among Evangelicals) think that there is a consensus among scientists that urgent action on climate change is needed and that enough is known to take action. Those who perceive such a consensus are more supportive of taking action on climate change. Those who perceive such a consensus are also more likely to see it as a spiritual obligation.

SAMPLING ERROR

The poll was fielded from September 9 to 19, 2011 with a sample of 1,496 adult Americans. The poll was conducted using the web-enabled KnowledgePanel®, a probability-based panel designed to be representative of the U.S. population.

The margin of error for the general population is plus or minus 3.3 percent. The subgroup margins of error: for Evangelicals, plus or minus 6.4 percent and plus or minus 5.7 percent for Catholics.

'BELIEVERS'

At the beginning of the poll, all respondents were asked, "Would you say you believe in God or do not believe in God?" Eighty-five percent of the general answered they did believe in God, while 14 percent said they did not. When respondents were asked whether they felt "there are spiritual obligations to act in certain ways," or whether they did "not think in these terms," 67 percent said they felt there are spiritual obligations; 32 percent said they did not think in these terms.

Explore further: Small, not big data key to working out what consumers want

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Poll: Most people reject evolution theory

Mar 08, 2006

A Gallup Poll released Wednesday suggests about 53 percent of Americans rejects the theory of evolution as the explanation for the origin of humans.

Recommended for you

User comments : 40

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Nanobanano
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 07, 2011
So much for the physorg blog mafia's "Creationists are idiots" mantra.
Nerdyguy
3.4 / 5 (5) Dec 07, 2011
A better copy of the article, with more detail and a link to the actual research here:

http://newsdesk.u...eID=2576

You're welcom PhysOrg.

The study seems surprisingly well put together. However, it covers a huge amount of (intellectual) territory, so I find it difficult to put too much credence in its claim that it is "representative" of anything more than the polling sample. One big divide though that was interesting is between religious people who believe the science on these issues vs. those that do not believe the science. Once they weeded out those who do not believe the science, the numbers change dramatically.
FrankHerbert
3.1 / 5 (111) Dec 07, 2011
I'll believe it when they elect someone that supposedly shares their views. John Huntsman was the only GOP presidential candidate that was willing to accept climate change and he even just went back on that a day or two ago.

Let them put their votes where their mouth supposedly is.
Nerdyguy
2.6 / 5 (8) Dec 07, 2011
A better copy of the article, with more detail and a link to the actual research here:

...

The study seems surprisingly well put together. However, it covers a huge amount of (intellectual) territory, so I find it difficult to put too much credence in its claim that it is "representative" of anything more than the polling sample. One big divide though that was interesting is between religious people who believe the science on these issues vs. those that do not believe the science. Once they weeded out those who do not believe the science, the numbers change dramatically.


LMAO! Robovoter strikes again.

I finished typing the above quote, hit refresh, and it IMMEDIATELY had 5 "1" votes. Interestingly, the ONLY one that shows is FrankyboyHerbert. Who is, not coincidentally, showing up right behind my every post and claiming it as coincidence. I think I have a new admirer.

Truly roflmfao stuff.
Nerdyguy
3 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2011
I'll believe it when they elect someone that supposedly shares their views. John Huntsman was the only GOP presidential candidate that was willing to accept climate change and he even just went back on that a day or two ago.

Let them put their votes where their mouth supposedly is.


Understandable that you'd make this mistake, as it was widely -- though quite incorrectly -- reported as the case.

From Huntsman:
"Let me be very clear on this: there is no change," he told reporters after his speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition. "I put my faith and trust in science. So you have 99 of 100 climate scientists who have come out and talked about climate change in certain terms, what is responsible for it. I tend to say this is a discussion that should not be in the political lane but should be in the scientific lane."
FrankHerbert
3.1 / 5 (112) Dec 07, 2011
Why are you cyber-stalking me, Nerdyguy? It's pathetic you follow me around threads all day trying to accuse me of robotvoting and whatever else your paranoid mind comes up with.

"The Paranoid Style in American Politics"
http://karws.gso....yle.html
The enemy is clearly delineated: he is a perfect model of malice, a kind of amoral supermansinister, ubiquitous, powerful, cruel, sensual, luxury-loving. Unlike the rest of us, the enemy is not caught in the toils of the vast mechanism of history, himself a victim of his past, his desires, his limitations. He wills, indeed he manufactures, the mechanism of history, or tries to deflect the normal course of history in an evil way.


Occam's razor says you're paranoid.

Care to actually contribute and address my point about Huntsman? Or are you only interested in disinformation?
Nerdyguy
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 07, 2011
Why are you cyber-stalking me, Nerdyguy? It's pathetic you follow me around threads all day trying to accuse me of robotvoting and whatever else your paranoid mind comes up with.


lol psycho-troll. It's easy enough to prove your lie. Anyone can find my posts and see your post...one or two down. Not every time. Just about 98% of the time. Thanks for playing, but you fail! Try harder next time!
FrankHerbert
3.1 / 5 (111) Dec 07, 2011
I've never denied that I don't like you and vote you down because you have awful, offensive opinions. This is not evidence of some robovoting conspiracy. You try to attribute every person who votes you down to me. That's a symptom of paranoia.

You're free to vote me down. Have at it!

But here's your chance to redeem yourself and actually address a point and not some paranoid delusion of yours!

Care to actually contribute and address my point about Huntsman? Or are you only interested in disinformation?
Nerdyguy
1.3 / 5 (37) Dec 07, 2011
@FrankHerbert: PM'ing nasty messages is a clear violation of the PhysOrg policies. Just a friendly reminder.
freethinking
1.3 / 5 (40) Dec 07, 2011
Dumb poll which is worthless other than as propaganda for progressives. Dig deep ask questions and you'll see how stupid and leading the meaningless the questions are.

Also NG, FH is a nice guy, he would never PM nasty messages, never! You just don't understand him, do as I do and wish him and his family a very merry Christmas.

NG and to everyone else on this board, Merry Christmas!
Nerdyguy
1.2 / 5 (36) Dec 07, 2011
Dumb poll which is worthless other than as propaganda for progressives. Dig deep ask questions and you'll see how stupid and leading the meaningless the questions are.

Also NG, FH is a nice guy, he would never PM nasty messages, never! You just don't understand him, do as I do and wish him and his family a very merry Christmas.

NG and to everyone else on this board, Merry Christmas!


Merry Christmas to you too!

About the research - like you I saw it as having a rather obvious political bent.
Shootist
1 / 5 (4) Dec 08, 2011
US believers favor international action on climate change, nuclear risk: poll


I guess there are people who'll put their trust in anything they imagine is more powerful than they, be it Mighty Zoosh, Yahweh or Government.

"The Polar Bears will be fine." - Freeman Dyson

sadly, Dobie Gray has passed away.
http://www.youtub...nOASOWIU
FrankHerbert
3.1 / 5 (111) Dec 08, 2011
"The Polar Bears will be fine." - Freeman Dyson


You are intellectually dishonest. It has been pointed out to you many times this is a fallacious appeal to authority.

Stop it.

I guess there are people who'll put their trust in anything they imagine is more powerful than they, be it Mighty Zoosh, Yahweh or Government.


Unlike the other two, the latter actually exists.
Guy_Underbridge
3.4 / 5 (5) Dec 08, 2011
"a probability-based panel designed to be representative of the U.S. population" who have internet and answer web-based polls.
STEWARDSHIP: Most agree they have an obligation to act as good stewards of the environment...
...unless we need to nuke countries we don't like.
ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS: 2 out of 3 believers agree that there is an obligation to care for God's creation by supporting environmental laws...
...as long as I personally don't have to vote for it, or publicly take a pro-environmental stance among people I know.
BINDING INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS: Majorities of believers approve of the United States entering into binding international agreements aimed at protecting the environment...
...and if it don't work, then I can blame them dang foreigners. Besides, they're the ones doing all the polluting.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.9 / 5 (7) Dec 08, 2011
"I finished typing the above quote, hit refresh, and it IMMEDIATELY had 5 "1" votes." - NerdBoy

You only have 3 votes total, and I just voted you a 1 because you were too stupid to figure out how to read the vote summary and confused the total possible score (5) with the total votes cast(0).

Guy_Underbridge
2.6 / 5 (5) Dec 08, 2011
So much for the physorg blog mafia's "Creationists are idiots" mantra.
yep, this fall into the category "Creationists are hypocrites". If people voted the numbers shown in this poll, the US would have some pretty damn stringent environmental laws...
Vendicar_Decarian
2.6 / 5 (5) Dec 08, 2011
"The Polar Bears will be fine." - Freeman Dyson

That's Alzheimer talking there Tard Boy.
MarkyMark
3 / 5 (2) Dec 08, 2011

Also NG, FH is a nice guy, he would never PM nasty messages, never!

NG and to everyone else on this board, Merry Christmas!
Bullshit he sent me a one word PM recently for no reason i could see. The word in question was Faggot! All that PM did was make me wonder which post he thought made me gay?
freethinking
1.8 / 5 (4) Dec 08, 2011
MM,FH like VD and many if not most Progressives are full of hate and anger. I know that, I have been on the receiving end of their hate and have received hateful, bigoted, threatening PM's.

My response has been to speak the truth, and not respond hate for hate, threat for threat. FH, VD and many others who have become progressives have done so because they don't know how to handle anger or hate or have been deeply hurt by someone.

So lets respond in truth and love. We can teach Progressives such as VD and FH about truth by always speaking the truth no matter how much they try to shout it down. We teach progressives about love by showing them respect as a person, even when they say nasty things.

So to you MarkyMark, to VD, FH, and to everyone else on this board, no matter how progressive or how conservative, no matter how hateful or loving, I truly wish all of you MERRY CHRISTMAS and may the truth of CHRISTMAS enrich your heart.
freethinking
1.8 / 5 (4) Dec 08, 2011
Thinking about it, I will now end every post now till end of the Christmas season with Merry Christmas, because I actually mean it. I want everyone to have a MERRY CHRISTMAS.

So, I challenge everyone on this board progressive or conservative to do so. Maybe if everyone who truly wants and wishes the world to have less hate, if they wish (and truly mean/wants!) everyone they meet to have a MERRY CHRISTMAS, just perhaps, there might be more love.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (1) Dec 08, 2011
4 out 10 believers say the obligation to be a good steward of the environment includes the obligation to prevent nuclear war.

Holy smokes. Only 4 out of 10? What's with these people?

So much for the physorg blog mafia's "Creationists are idiots" mantra.

Since when does 'believer' equate to 'creationist'?

MERRY CHRISTMAS and may the truth of CHRISTMAS enrich your heart.

Please keep the religionist crap out of this thread. I was much happier before that came up. Thanks.
CHollman82
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 08, 2011
I've never denied that I don't like you and vote you down because you have awful, offensive opinions.


You obviously don't understand that the voting feature is not supposed to be used to express your disagreement with someone's opinion... you can do that in words by replying to them... the voting feature is SUPPOSED to be used to rate the QUALITY of someone's contribution to the discussion... not whether you agree with them or not.
CHollman82
1.1 / 5 (35) Dec 08, 2011
So much for the physorg blog mafia's "Creationists are idiots" mantra.
yep, this fall into the category "Creationists are hypocrites". If people voted the numbers shown in this poll, the US would have some pretty damn stringent environmental laws...


...and even less of an industrial base and much higher unemployment...

We can't impose super strict environmental regulations unless all other countries do the same, or they will easily out-compete for heavy industry and manufacturing.

All Americans like it when their jobs are sent overseas right?
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (2) Dec 08, 2011
We can't impose super strict environmental regulations unless all other countries do the same, or they will easily out-compete for heavy industry and manufacturing.

Hold on a sec...

...Isn't the US capitalist and a proponent of free markets? And isn't competition what capitalism is all about?

Now I'm confused.

Stringent environmental laws can be seen as a chance. It forces people to develop new and better (more efficient) products. It forces people to deploy better machines. This is a huge market in itself. And if done properly can be turned into a vast amount of exports since all the world will have to use more environmental products/manufacturing means in the future.

Sticking to 'no regulations' just means "same old, same old".
Everybody knows what happens to "same old" in a free market.
FrankHerbert
3.1 / 5 (110) Dec 08, 2011
I sent freethinking a few rude PMs after receiving doozies like this:
05.27.2011 13:12
Did, you really need to study history. Either you are ignorant about the crusades, or you are an appologist for murderous muslims.

LOL I forgot about this one. As early as June paranoids were trying to morph me and all their other least favorite posters into some amorphous enemy.
06.16.2011 11:47
FH your a sock puppet for SH.

I'm waiting for your threats now.... waiting.....

Either you are ignorant of facts (a good possiblity since you are a progressive) or you are (I'll let you fill in the blanks :))

In response to accusing him of leaving a topic after his bigotry was clearly pointed out. (Original topic: http://www.physor...ogy.html )
06.20.2011 17:24
Sorry I didn't respond. I need to make a living and cant be on Physorg 24/7. You are either unemployed, working for the DNC, or stealing time and resources from your employer.
FrankHerbert
3.1 / 5 (110) Dec 08, 2011
Any sane people are welcome to visit this topic: http://www.physor...ogy.html and then come back here and view freethinking's comments in context.

Here's more PMs.
07.18.2011 18:28
I know you and your type want illigal aliens.

09.12.2011 14:09
So are you a criminal? You are so hatefilled and want more criminals in the USA, I just had to ask.


I got this one out of the blue recently, which goaded me into calling him a few choice words. I'm not sorry.
12.05.2011 10:55
FH, who has hurt you so much that you are filled with so much hate? Even if you are a homosexual God does love you and will accept you. Even the most undeserving person can be accepted by God. As the Bible says, for God so loved the world that He sent His Son, that WHOEVER (you, the least deserving person) believes on Him they will be accepted and saved by God.

FrankHerbert
3.1 / 5 (110) Dec 08, 2011
After viewing his posts in this topic, do you think I would have been foolish to take him up on his offer?

12.05.2011 19:52
FYI, if you ever let me know who filled your life with hate, I wont mention it on the public side of this forum, and I do hope your hate will one day disapear. You'll feel much happier. Also if you are gay (not saying you are) I don't think that you are a less of a person than I am.

BTW, Best wishes to you and have a Merry Christmas


Very Christian of you freethinking, trying to get someone to reveal personal things so you can release them in public all the while hiding behind "Merry Christmas" and christian 'altrusim'.

You are despicable.
CHollman82
2.7 / 5 (3) Dec 08, 2011
We can't impose super strict environmental regulations unless all other countries do the same, or they will easily out-compete for heavy industry and manufacturing.

Hold on a sec...

...Isn't the US capitalist and a proponent of free markets? And isn't competition what capitalism is all about?


Are you asking me what the ideology is or what the reality is?

Sure, if the ENTIRE WORLD was TRULY capitalist (which even the US isn't) then a worldwide free market would be ideal...

This is not the case in reality. In reality the global population is split under multiple rulers with multiple different social and economic policies that do not play well together.
CHollman82
1.4 / 5 (14) Dec 08, 2011
Stringent environmental laws can be seen as a chance. It forces people to develop new and better (more efficient) products. It forces people to deploy better machines. This is a huge market in itself. And if done properly can be turned into a vast amount of exports since all the world will have to use more environmental products/manufacturing means in the future.


I'm sorry this is nonsense... the average Joe Blow at Walmart is not going to pick widget B over widget A because it killed 2 fewer trees to produce if it costs 50 cents more.

People will TELL you that they care about the environment every single time you ask, what they do at the store however is a completely different story. All else equal, the cheaper product that is worse for the environment will ALWAYS out-sell the alternative.

I'm not saying what I think about this, I am just stating the reality of the situation.
freethinking
1.3 / 5 (16) Dec 08, 2011
FH I have never used a derogatory word for any race, creed, sexual choice, handicap, birth circumstance or religion, I leave that up to hateful spiteful people.

Just to put a few things in context, I have not called you a homosexual, however you constantly calling me a derogatory name for one made me wonder if you were a self loathing one? Also your hateful rants and PMs made me wonder if someone did hurt you?

Also, you can release any of my PMs, but please release them in context. Obviously many people have received PMs from you, so Im not worried about my reputation.

Anyway, Merry Christmas!
FrankHerbert
3.1 / 5 (109) Dec 08, 2011
One only needs to view this topic to see freethinking's reprehensible view of homosexuals, no slurs required.

http://www.physor...ogy.html

To be truthful AIDS would not exist and would be eliminated if men would not participate in homosexual sex.


You don't deserve a Merry Christmas.
CHollman82
1.2 / 5 (36) Dec 08, 2011
"freethinking", your comments in that discussion linked above are nothing short of disturbing.

At one point you said that if everyone followed Christian values AIDS wouldn't exist... what is wrong with you?
antialias_physorg
3 / 5 (2) Dec 08, 2011
At one point you said that if everyone followed Christian values AIDS wouldn't exist... what is wrong with you?

Well, you said it yourself: He's christian.

Are you asking me what the ideology is or what the reality is?

Sure, if the ENTIRE WORLD was TRULY capitalist (which even the US isn't) then a worldwide free market would be ideal...

I'm saying that protectionism isn't going to work (the fallout from the environmental disaster will cost us much more than conforming to stricter regulations). There are countries that have strict emission laws. E.g. the stricter emission laws for automobiles haven't put one carmaker out of business. Neither have the stricter laws for refineries. Neither have the stricter laws for coal power plants that have been passed over the years and have necessitated installation of filters.
freethinking
1.2 / 5 (5) Dec 08, 2011
Nothing, IF everyone followed Christian values AIDS would not exist is a true statement. FYI, you get AIDS primarily via sex with an infected partner (yes there are innocent victims). IF everyone followed Christian values and only had sex in Marriage, AIDS would disappear within a generation. Also there would be no innocent victims of this disease.

BTW all over VD diseases would also disappear.

What is wrong with you that you don't want to rid the world of horrible diseases?

Merry Christmas.
Guy_Underbridge
4 / 5 (4) Dec 08, 2011
IF everyone followed Christian values...
you mean do as I say, but not as I do?

If everyone stopped having sex altogether, AIDS wouldn't be the only disease to disappear.
CHollman82
3 / 5 (3) Dec 08, 2011
Nothing, IF everyone followed Christian values AIDS would not exist is a true statement. FYI, you get AIDS primarily via sex with an infected partner (yes there are innocent victims). IF everyone followed Christian values and only had sex in Marriage, AIDS would disappear within a generation. Also there would be no innocent victims of this disease.


You're a fool.

How do you think the FIRST person contracted HIV? Not from a sexual partner, because then they wouldn't be the first... so tell me, how did the FIRST person to have the HIV virus contract it?

Idiot...
Vendicar_Decarian
3 / 5 (2) Dec 11, 2011
Wasn't AIDS created by the NSA to reduce the black population of America?
GDM
1 / 5 (1) Dec 11, 2011
I'm with Guy Underbridge and Antialias on this one: I'm truely amazed that the polling results were so UNchristian, and more people didn't agree with questions put forth.

Oh, and HAPPY HOLIDAYS! The season is not restricted to Christians alone, so stop pretending that christianity is the only thing that matters.
bhiestand
5 / 5 (1) Dec 14, 2011
One huge problem with this study: the definition of believers. If you define your subsample as 85% of the sample, with such a silly question, you're not doing good research. This team should have at least asked how often the subjects attended church or how important religion was in their lives.

The majority of Christians who attend church less than once a week are probably not THAT serious about it. Only ~38-40% of Americans attend church weekly. Those who have never gone in their lives but still identify as Christian will answer "Yes" and be counted as believers. What are they measuring here? Certainly not the effects of religious participation or seriosity regarding religion (yes, that's a word now).
kochevnik
1.7 / 5 (3) Dec 14, 2011
@freeofthinking What is wrong with you that you don't want to rid the world of horrible diseases?
So you're saying that the bye-bull cures disease, not medicine? So when you're sick you just have a bye-bull study, cross burning, dung eating, first-born sacrifice or whatever your particular cult practices? You must save a lot on hospital bills.