The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled today that same-sex couples have the right to marry, reversing a lower court ruling that civil unions had offered the same rights and benefits as marriage, the Associated Press reports.

The court ruled 4-3 that gay and lesbian couples cannot be denied the freedom to marry under the state constitution.

Connecticut joins California and Massachusetts as the only states that allow same-sex marriage. High courts in New York, New Jersey and Washington have ruled that there is no right to same-sex marriage under their constitutions.

In his majority opinion, Justice Richard N. Palmer wrote that the court found that the “segregation of heterosexual and homosexual couples into separate institutions constitutes a cognizable harm,” in light of “the history of pernicious discrimination faced by gay men and lesbians, and because the institution of marriage carries with it a status and significance that the newly created classification of civil unions does not embody.”

In his dissent, Justice Peter Zarella said any decision on gay marriage should be left to the legislature

"The ancient definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman has its basis in biology, not bigotry," Zarella wrote. "If the state no longer has an interest in the regulation of procreation, then that is a decision for the legislature or the people of the state and not this court."

The Hartford Courant writes that eight same-sex couples had brought the case after they were denied marriage licenses in 2004. A Superior Court ruled in July 2006 that civil unions already provide all the rights and protections of marriage. The couples then appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court.

Connecticut joins California and Massachusetts as the only states that allow same-sex marriage. High courts in New York, New Jersey and Washington have ruled that there is no right to same-sex marriage under their constitutions.

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 10, 2008 11:15AM | Comments (8)

One of the big takeaways from [yesterday]'s new poll on religious voters is that white evangelicals under 35 are a lot more progressive than their parents, by a number of different measures. It's worth noting that abortion is not one of them:

More than six-in-ten (62%) say abortion is very important to their vote, compared to 55% of older evangelicals. Young white evangelicals are also strongly opposed to abortion rights, with approximately one-third saying abortion should be legal all or most of the time--almost identical to the percentage of older evangelicals.

But gay rights and diplomacy and other issues are are a much different story:

On the issue of same-sex marriage, by contrast, the influence of their generational peers is clear. Nearly four-in-ten young evangelicals say they have a close friend or family member who is gay or lesbian--a rate approximately the same as all young adults and more than double the rate of older evangelicals. Among older evangelicals, nearly half (49%) say same-sex marriage is an important voting issue, and a strong majority (61%) say there should be no legal recognition of a gay couple's relationship. Among younger white evangelicals, however, less than a majority see same-sex marriage as a very important voting issue, and a majority (52%) favor either same-sex marriage or civil unions. The generation gap is largest on the issue of marriage, where younger white evangelicals are more than 2.5 times as likely to support same-sex marriage than older white evangelicals.

Despite their conservative views on abortion and stereotypes as single-issue voters, like older white evangelicals, young white evangelicals have a voting agenda that is much broader than abortion and same-sex marriage. Fully two-thirds of younger evangelicals say they would still vote for a candidate even if the candidate disagreed with them on the issue of abortion. Younger evangelicals rank a number of other issues, such as economic issues, terrorism, and Iraq higher than abortion, and roughly equal numbers say that health care is a very important voting issue as say abortion.

....A majority (56%) of younger evangelicals believe that diplomacy rather than military strength is the best way to ensure peace, compared to only 44% of older white evangelicals. Finally, younger white evangelicals are more likely than older white evangelicals to favor a bigger government offering more services by a margin of 20 points (44% and 24% respectively).

And yet that leftward lurch on issues doesn't translate into as dramatic a shift on the candidates:

Like older evangelicals, younger evangelicals strongly identify with the Republican Party and support John McCain, but levels of support among younger evangelicals were modestly lower for McCain (65% vs. 69%) and higher for Barack Obama (29% vs. 25%). Like their generational peers, younger evangelicals are also significantly less likely to identify as conservative than older evangelicals.

So what gives? A few analysts on this morning's Faith in Public Life call pinned Obama's failure to peel off more young evangelical voters from John McCain on a lackluster effort to reach those voters by the Obama team.

That doesn't wash with God-o-Meter. Obama's religious outreach director is himself a 26-year-old Pentecostal. The Obama camp's current faith tour is built largely around sending evangelical author Donald Miller to evangelical campuses like Calvin College and to campuses in evangelical strongholds, such as Hope College in Holland, Michigan.

An Obama aide says the campaign's religious outreach team had no illusions about being able to make major inroads into the evangelical world: "Our outreach is concentrated in states like Pennsylvania and Ohio. We're talking to moderate faith voters broadly, often more to Mainline Protestants than evangelicals. Bush won Mainliners in 2004 so that's been a focus. We're winning Catholics and Mainliners and Latino evangelicals, and we've increased over 2004 among evangelicals while McCain has dropped a few points."

But it's undeniable that evangelical outreach has been a major focus of Obama's effort. So what's the real reason his evangelical outreach has paid such patry dividends?

(Originally posted at Beliefnet's God-o-Meter)

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 9, 2008 8:30PM | Comments (18)

You can become a Facebook fan of this politics blog and you can join me on Twitter.

Also, Christianity Today created a special page for the 2008 election that includes profiles of Barack Obama and John McCain, details on the state ballot initiatives, plus previous editorials and news stories.

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 9, 2008 8:49AM | Comments (1)

Most young evangelicals will not vote for Barack Obama with their peers and will not support John McCain as strongly as their parents next month, a survey released this morning suggests.

Most young adults overwhelmingly support Obama (59 percent) while 35 percent plan to vote for McCain. On the other hand, 29 percent of young evangelicals plan to vote for Obama and 65 percent support McCain. Nearly 70 percent of older evangelicals plan to vote for McCain while 25 percent plan to vote for Obama.

Faith in Public Life released a new survey today called "The Young and the Faithful" conducted by Public Religion Research from August 28 to September 19.

The generation gap in this survey is closer than the results found in the Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly survey, which found that older evangelicals support McCain nine more percentage points than younger evangelicals.

The survey also found an interesting comparison between what issues evangelicals find important in the 2008 election and what evangelicals are hearing about in church.

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 8, 2008 10:37AM | Comments (12)

I think we all can stipulate this. Sarah Palin's religious identity has been a major, if not the major, source of both the enthusiasm and the antipathy that she's generated. The evangelical base of the Republican Party recognizes her as one of its own. The secularist base of the Democratic Party recognizes her as the religious right made vice presidential flesh. And so, in an era when candidates for national office are expected to sit down and chat about how their religious backgrounds shape their worldviews and public service, why have none of the handful of journalistic interlocutors who've gotten a whack at her ventured into this territory?

At the moment, there's some Jewish unhappiness, including in the higher reaches of Jewish Republicanism, about Palin's lack of responsiveness in addressing the "Jews for Jesus" question that arose when it emerged that she had been in the congregation when that organization's head showed up and declared that Palestinian violence against Israelis was God's judgment on the Israelis for not having embraced Jesus.

While a spokesman for Palin has said that the Republican running mate rejects this view, the McCain-Palin campaign has declined to say whether she shares her pastor’s general support for Jews for Jesus -- a group that Jewish organizations accuse of using deceptive tactics because it tells people they can embrace Jesus and still remain true to Judaism.

Asked this week whether the Alaska governor would condemn the missionary group, McCain-Palin campaign spokesman Michael Goldfarb told JTA that “vice-presidential candidates cannot be in the business of condemning religious groups who do not commit violence” in a country that guarantees "freedom of religion."

Goldfarb added that it is “extremely inappropriate for any elected official” to comment “on any religious group” and its mission. “That's a fundamental breach of the separation of church and state,” he said.

Right. Like Sen. Lieberman should not celebrate the mission of Christians United for Israel and praise its leader as a Man of God.

There are, of course, any number of faith-based questions to be tossed in Palin's direction. But the general expectation is that she is not going to be engaging in any more tetes-a-tete with MSM types until Nov. 5 or thereabouts. And so, like the prisoners in Plato's cave, we seem to be condemned to knowing little more of Palin's faith than the shadows cast on the wall in front of us by the flickering light of YouTube.

(Originally published at Spiritual Politics)

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 8, 2008 9:17AM | Comments (41)

A few years ago it looked like opposition to gay marriage was going to equal or surpass abortion as the ultimate wedge issue - a device capable of defeating Democrats in all but the most-liberal districts.

And yet consider this:

-The topic didn't come up in Tuesday's debate
-There's not been a single McCain-Palin ad on gay marriage.
-John McCain did not mention it in his acceptance speech at the Republican convention.
-Sarah Palin did not mention it in her convention acceptance speech, either.
-Of the 57 speeches listed on McCain's Web site, I couldn't find a single mention of the gay marriage issue.

What happened?

For starters, the topic has less currency because there are fewer referendums on state ballots. While 11 states considered ballot initiatives in 2004, only three are this year. That means fewer campaign dollars and volunteer hours focused on the issue.

More important, public opinion has shifted. Social issues in general have become less important to voters as the economy has worsened. The new Twelve Tribes study by Beliefnet and the University of Akron, showed that percentage of people listing moral issues as most important is now half what it was in 2004.

But that's just part of the explanation. After all, abortion is getting significant attention. The Catholic bishops, for instance, have been far more vocal opposing abortion than gay marriage. It's not like social issues have completely disappeared.

Rather, while the public hasn't much changed its views on abortion, it has on gay rights. For instance, in 2004 48% of "Convertible Catholics" supported civil unions or gay marriage. In 2008, 61% do. Among Moderate Evangelicals, the percentage was 33% in 2004, 42% in 2008.

Just as important, young people have starkly different views on gay issues than their parents. Most surveys show this but it's particularly striking among evangelical Christians, who are just as anti-abortion as their parents but significantly more supportive of gay rights. The Barna Group asked "born again Christians" if they believed that "homosexual lifestyles" are a "major problem" The results show a stunning shift by age:

Age
18-41 -- 35%
42-60: -- 52%
61+: -- 71%

With support for gay marriage or civil unions rising, conservative politicians have to be careful where and how they push this issue.

Though McCain approved a Republican platform that called for a constitutional amendment on gay marriage, he routinely contradicts that view by saying he wants it left up to the states. When McCain and Palin do discuss their opposition to gay marriage it's now usually accompanied by a statement of tolerance towards homosexuals.

Political strategists realize there are still large numbers of people who view gay marriage as a major threat. But now, candidates must appeal to them without alienating moderates or younger voters.

Since abortion seems to work just as well as ever among culturally conservative voters like moderate evangelicals, they figure: stick with that.

Adapted from Steven Waldman's "Political Perceptions" column at the Wall Street Journal Online.

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 8, 2008 9:00AM | Comments (6)

Barack Obama and John McCain are making jabs at each other as they walk around at the town hall debate tonight.

Most of the debate has focused on the economy, including the bailout, healthcare, and tax cuts so far. A transcript is available here.

The debate shifted to foreign policy with a question about the candidates' support for Israel: "If, despite your best diplomatic efforts, Iran attacks Israel, would you be willing to commit U.S. troops in support and defense of Israel? Or would you wait on approval from the U.N. Security Council?"

McCain said, "Let me say that we obviously would not wait for the United Nations Security Council. ... we can never allow a second Holocaust to take place."

Obama: "If we could have intervened effectively in the Holocaust, who among us would say that we had a moral obligation not to go in? ... So when genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening somewhere around the world and we stand idly by, that diminishes us."

There were seven references to God in the vice presidential debate. Tonight, zero. McCain said "my friends" or "my friend" 22 times, but there was little faith talk from either candidate tonight.

Maybe the closest was Obama's line when referring to McCain's approach to health care: "So what one hand giveth, the other hand taketh away." Sounds a tiny bit like Job's "the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away."

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 7, 2008 8:43PM | Comments (7)

Remember back to the Republican primaries, when Mike Huckabee campaigned as a new kind of evangelical candidate, adding issues like the environment, education, and poverty to the hot-button agenda of God, guns, and gays?

That big-tent Huck seems to be in much shorter supply now. An email the Arkansas governor just sent out soliciting donations for his political action committee--whose beneficiaries include John McCain and Sarah Palin--asks fors $5 for each of these five red meat issues:

1. Protection of Human Life 2. Traditional Marriage 3. Tax policy that doesn't punish people for working, but rewards them 4. 2nd amendment rights 5. Supreme Court and Federal Court judge selection

Is this more evidence that the "new kind of evangelical voter" story has been overplayed? Or just that Huck is changing his tune a bit?

(Originally posted at Beliefnet's God-o-Meter)

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 7, 2008 3:37PM | Comments (6)

In case you haven't seen it yet, Tina Fey included a small religion reference in her most recent Saturday Night Live skit.

"Gwen, we don't know if this climate change hoozie-what's-it is man-made or if it's just a natural part of the 'End of Days.'"

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 6, 2008 11:16AM | Comments (9)

As Michigan goes, so goes Ohio? The big (2,262 likely voters) Columbus Dispatch Ohio poll, showing Obama up 49-42, has Buckeye Catholics flipping from 55-44 for Bush in 2004 to 49-44 for Obama. Protestants are just about where they were four years ago; unfortunately, the poll does not break out evangelicals. Jews prefer Obama 66-31--within hailing distance of the 70 percent mark I'm predicting. And note this. Among the 10 percent of Ohio voters who profess no religion, Bush dropped nine percentage points from 2000 to 2004, to 29 percent. McCain now stands 15 points below that. Other than African Americans (also 10 percent of the voting population), no voting bloc is more pro-Obama.

(Originally published at Spiritual Politics)

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 6, 2008 8:58AM | Comments (15)

The House of Representatives voted 263-171 today to pass the Senate’s version of the $700 billion bailout bill, a plan some evangelicals told me they cautiously support.

The House voted against the plan on Monday, creating a steep decline in the markets. The Senate sweetened the deal, adding $150 billion in tax breaks and increased Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation coverage from $100,000 to $250,000. The bill would also bill would curb executive pay, provide relief from the Alternative Minimum Tax for another year, and set up oversight committees.

Update: President Bush signed the bailout bill.

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 3, 2008 12:40PM | Comments (6)

A new Saint Anselm College New Hampshire poll, showing Obama up by 12 points, has him leading among Protestants by seven and among Catholics by four. No white Catholic problem for him there. The poll turned up 70 born-again/evangelical Christians, who broke 54-29 for McCain--providing some more confirmation for my hypothesis that evangelicals in the North are significantly more likely to prefer Obama than their co-religionists in Dixie.

(Originally published at Spiritual Politics)

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 3, 2008 10:56AM | Comments (2)

Joe Biden and Sarah Palin are debating over tax breaks and healthcare during tonight's debate. Palin seemed very nervous at the beginning but smoothed out eventually. Here's a partial transcript from CNN.

When asked about climate change, Palin said she didn't want to argue over the causes while Biden said it is man made.

Biden says that same sex couples should have the same constitutional and legal rights as heterosexual couples. Palin say she's doesn't want to re-define the traditional definition of marriage, which Biden said he agrees.

Biden: "Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage. We do not support that. That is basically the decision to be able to be left to faiths and people who practice their faiths the determination what you call it."

The debate moves to foreign policy. Biden says religious leaders control Iran's foreign policy. Palin says there must be a two-state solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflicts.

Both candidates call for the end of the genocide in Darfur.

I'm waiting for the transcript to get the context for these, but Palin seems to be speaking Christianese: "Her reward is in heaven," "worldview," "city on a hill."

Update: Palin to Biden "I know education you are passionate about with your wife being a teacher for 30 years, and God bless her. Her reward is in heaven, right?"

Update: "That world view that says that America is a nation of exceptionalism. And we are to be that shining city on a hill, as President Reagan so beautifully said, that we are a beacon of hope and that we are unapologetic here."

An abortion reference slipped in when Biden talked about why he changed his views on appointing Bork to the Supreme Court.

"Had he been on the court, I suspect there would be a lot of changes that I don't like and the American people wouldn't like, including everything from Roe v. Wade to issues relating to civil rights and civil liberties."

TV commentators are saying people who were hoping for a train wreck are probably disappointed.

The Susan B. Anthony List president implies a comeback for Palin but doesn't offer to say where she went.

"The Sarah we saw tonight was the same Sarah from the GOP convention - the real Sarah. She is back," Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement.

In a CNN poll, 51 percent thought Biden did the best job, while 36 percent thought Palin did the best job. However, respondents said Palin was more likable, scoring 54 percent to Biden's 36 percent.

The Boston Globe's Michael Paulson writes, "Joe Biden wasn't asked about whether he should take Communion. Sarah Palin wasn't asked whether she speaks in tongues. In fact, tonight's vice-presidential debate featured only minimal talk of faith at all..." Reuters' Tom Heneghan asks, "Has the faith factor fizzled in the U.S. campaign?"

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 2, 2008 8:08PM | Comments (24)

Liberty Legal Institute is representing five state legislators suing to stop the Alaska legislature's investigation into Troopergate, the Anchorage Daily News reports.

Troopergate is an investigation of whether Sarah Palin dismissed a public safety commissioner because he wouldn't fire a state trooper who went through an divorce with her sister.

Sean Cockerham writes that Liberty Legal Institute lists its guiding principles as limited government and promotion of Judeo-Christian values, but it's unclear in the article how the latter is involved in the case.

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 2, 2008 3:09PM | Comments (10)

About four in 10 white evangelical Protestants say Sarah Palin does not have the necessary experience to be an effective president, according to a recent poll conducted by Washington Post-ABC News.

Last weekend, two in 10 evangelicals planned to vote Barack Obama, according to survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 2, 2008 2:03PM | Comments (42)

I really admire this passage from Joe Biden's memoir, Promises to Keep. It's about the sudden death of his wife, Neilia (above), and their baby daughter Naomi in a car accident shortly after his election to the Senate in 1992. It is defiantly not an explication of the power of faith, but rather an honest -- and politically risky -- description of what it really felt like. His faith returned later, but I think anyone who has been through horrific tragedy will appreciate the honesty here:

They flew us to Wilmington, but I didn't know anything for sure until I got to the hospital. All the way up, I kept telling myself that everything was going to be okay, that I was letting my imagination run away with me, but the minute I got to the hospital and saw Jimmy's face, I knew the worst had happened. Beau, Hunt and Naomi had been in the car with Neilia when the accident happened. Neilia had been killed and so had our baby daughter. The boys were both alive, but Beau had a lot of broken bones and hunt had injuries. The doctors couldn't rule out permanent damage. I could not speak, only felt this hollow core grow in my chest, like I was gong to be sucked inside a black hole.

The first few days I felt trapped in a constant twilight of vertigo, like in the dream where you're suddenly falling...only I was constantly falling. In moments of fitful sleep I was aware of the dim possibility that I would wake up, truly wake up, and this would not have happened. But then I'd open my eyes to the sight of my sons in their hospital beds -Beau in a full body cast--and it was back. And as consciousness gathered again, I could always feel at least one other physical present in the room--and there would be Val, or my mom, or Jimmy. They never left my side. I have no memory of ever being physically alone.

Most of all I was numb, but there were moments when the pain cut through like a shard of broken class. I began to understand how despair led people to just cash it in; how suicide wasn't just an option but a rational option. But I'd look at Beau and Hunter asleep and wonder what new terrors their own dreams held, and wonder who would explain to my sons my being gone, too. And I knew I had no choice but to fight to stay alive.

Except for the memorial service, I stayed in the hospital room with my sons. My life collapsed into their needs. If I could focus on what they needed minute by minute, I thought I might stay out of the black hole. My future was telescoped into the effort of putting one foot in front of the other. The horizon faded fro my view. Washington, politics, the Senate had no hold on me. I was supposed to be sworn into the Senate in two weeks, but I could not bear to image the scene without Neilia....

There was good news: The doctors assured us that Beau and Hunter would make full recoveries. Beau's bones would mend. Hunter had no brain impairment. But Christmas passed with the boys in the hospital, and I began to feel my anger. When the boys were asleep or when Val or Mom was taking a turn at their bedside, I'd bust out of the hospital and go walking the nearby streets. Jimmy would go with me, and I'd steer him wordlessly down into the darkest and seediest neighborhoods I could find. I liked to go at night when I thought there was a better chance of finding a fight. I was always looking for a fight. I had not known I was capable of such rage. I knew I had been cheated out of a future, but I felt I'd been cheated of a past, too.

The underpinnings of my life had been kicked out from under me...and it wasn't just the loss of Neilia and Naomi. All my life, I'd been taught about our benevolent God. This is a forgiving God who is tolerant. This is a God who gave us free will to be able to doubt. This was a loving God, a God of comfort. Well, I didn't want to hear anything about a merciful God. No words, no prayer, no sermon gave me ease. I felt God had played a horrible trick on me, and I was angry. I found no comfort in the Church. So I kept walking the dark streets to try to exhaust the rage."

(Originally posted at Steve Waldman's blog at Beliefnet.)

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 2, 2008 1:33PM | Comments (58)

"Did you know that Joe Biden’s priest can forgive parishioners’ sins but can’t keep them out of jail if they commit a crime? No, really, it’s crazy! It’s almost like we’re talking about two completely different things!"

-- Mollie Hemingway of GetReligion.org, on news reports that "prominent Southern Baptists see nothing wrong with Sarah Palin serving as vice president" even as they believe women shouldn't be pastors.

Posted by Ted Olsen at  October 2, 2008 11:59AM | Comments (2)

NEWBERG, Ore. — Four students at George Fox University confessed to hanging an effigy of Sen. Barack Obama from a tree on campus and were suspended for up to a year, school officials announced Tuesday.

The students names were not released.

Other sanctions include community service and multicultural education, which must be completed before the students can return to campus, said Brad Lau, vice president of student life.

The students were singled out during a campus investigation late last week as those responsible for hanging a life-size cardboard cutout from a tree on campus with a sign saying "Act Six reject."

Act Six is a scholarship and leadership program for Portland students, many of whom are minorities.

"These students were very sorry and deeply grieved by the impact of this event," Lau said. "Regardless of their intentions, the image of a black man hanging from a tree is one of the most hurtful racist symbols of our history."

Lau declined to give any details about the investigation or the possible motivation of the four students.

The 3,355-student Christian university, which was founded by Quaker pioneers in 1891, stopped short of dismissing the students permanently. The campus is "a redemptive community, and we allow for the possibility of change," Lau said.

The FBI is continuing its investigation into possible civil rights violations, including whether the display intimidated minority students in exercising their federal rights, FBI spokeswoman Beth Anne Steele said.

Vanessa Wilkins, a 19-year-old sophomore in the Act Six program, said she is satisfied with the level of punishment of the four students. "I don't think they knew how far it would go," she said. "They didn't understand the repercussions of their actions. I don't believe the students thought this all the way through."

Related Elsewhere: Christian college president denounces Obama effigy

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 2, 2008 10:50AM | Comments (20)

WASHINGTON — Parents may know best, but when it comes to this year's election, fewer young evangelical voters are taking Mom's and Dad's advice into the voting booth, according to a new survey.

While Sen. John McCain maintains a winning margin among white evangelical Christians of all ages, young white evangelical voters are less supportive of McCain than evangelical voters over the age of 30, according to the poll conducted for the PBS program "Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly" by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research Inc.

McCain has the support of 71 percent of white evangelicals, but only 62 percent of white evangelicals between the ages of 18 and 29.

"Evangelical voters have been so solidly Republican in the last 20 years, so if this signals a shift, it could have wide-ranging political implications," said Kim Lawton, the managing editor of "Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly."

Some differences on social issues also were highlighted in the survey. A majority of younger white evangelicals support some form of legal recognition for civil unions or marriage for same-sex couples. Older evangelicals are strongly opposed.

Both age groups remain solidly opposed to abortion.

"There's been so much discussion about evangelical voters but there's been very little research," said Lawton. "This is the first to confirm there are some generational differences."
Jeff Fralick, a student at Baylor University, the world's largest Baptist university, may be even more confirmation of a shift.

"I believe that Barack Obama is the best choice for president," Fralick said. "For my parents, however, it is a different story."

Fralick has been actively involved in campaigning for the Democratic nominee on the Christian campus in Waco, Texas.

"In the past I feel that they (older evangelicals) have been swayed by the thought that a responsible and religious person voted one way, conservative," Fralick said of his parents. "They may not agree with it, but they can accept that I am following a good path, though it is different than theirs."

The nationwide survey included 1,400 adults, including 400 young evangelical Christians, and was conducted Sept. 4-21. The margin of error ranged from plus or minus 3.1 percentage points for the overall survey to plus or minus 5.5 percentage points for younger evangelicals.

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 2, 2008 10:31AM | Comments (13)

John McCain, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden voted with 71 senators to pass the $700 billion bailout bill that would allow the government to buy troubled securities, The New York Times reports.

The bill included $150 billion in tax breaks for individuals and businesses and increased the amount covered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation from $100,000 to $250,000. The bill was also attached to legislation requiring insurers to treat mental health conditions similar to general health problems, The Times reports. The House is expected to vote Friday.

Posted by Sarah Pulliam at  October 1, 2008 8:58PM | Comments (1)